Mephisto2

Link

Who does he want to tax then? The poor?

I really can't understand how this guy's politics are so popular in America.


Mr Mephisto

galadrium

Me neither, Bush hopes to get re-selected based on the fact that most people are not very interested and care little about politics.

__________________
Leading the Way

kutulu

If they just figure out a way to dodge the taxes then why do you need to give them an additional tax cut?

Half of an obscenly large amount of money is still an obscenly large amount of money.

matthew330

"fact that most people are not very interested and care little about politics."

...or care about what he actually said. You're right "what the fuck??" He never said don't tax the rich. This author apparently took the quote "rich people find a way to dodge their taxes" and ran with it.

This speech was in annendale, Va. and i just got finished watching it. He was simply referring to the fact that small business owners are the ones who will bear the brundt of any additional tax burden inacted by liberals, because these are the rich as defined by the left. as much as they would like you to believe gaudy, private-jet owning, pompous, born-with-a-silver-spoon-in-their-mouths rich people are the ones they would like you to believe they are going after (hell, these people find a million and one loopholes in getting out of their taxes anyway - hence, the above quote).

It really was a benign statement, not selling some tax plan on his behalf - but arguing against a tax plan Kerry would have.

what the fuck did the second half of the article have to do with the first anyway.

...his point was (and this is how you quote somebody) "Nobody in this country should pay more than 35% of their earning" (OH MY GOD - HOW COULD HE SAY SUCH A THING!!)

shakran

There's no point in criminalizing money laundering, extortion, and racketeering either because the real money launderers, extortionists, and racketeers are the mafia and they'll just figure out how to do it anyway.

No point in making murder illegal because people will commit murder anyway.

Hail to the Chief!


Oh and here's the full quote:

so yes, he is making a statement critical of taxing the rich.

matthew330

...and could you point me to where he said "Don't tax the rich."

as i said before, he was being critical of a kerry Tax plan, not rich people paying taxes.

kutulu

When he's supporting tax relief for the top teir of the country that's what he's saying.

matthew330

he's supporting tax relief for everybody. That "nobody pay more than 35% of their earnings."

But regardless of what tax strategy you support, that's not the point of the thread. The article was the point of the thread, and the article is bogus, as i've pointed out - and your trying to sidestep.

I won, you lost, thread closed.

shakran

Ahh. Stop debating everybody. Nothing to see here. Matthew330 has declared himself the victor in this argument, and he must be right

Can you tell me how his statement was NOT critical of taxing the rich?

kutulu

The point of the article is that Bush is talking out his ass once again. People in the top 1% make over 300k/yr. Those are the ones that stand the most to gain if the tax cuts remain permanent. He isn't cutting the budget to balance the decrease in funding so who else but the lower and middle classes and future generations do those cuts fall on?

People making over 300k/yr are not running struggling mom and pop shops. They might be running a mom and pop shop, but it sure as hell isn't struggling.

ARTelevision

I think in conversational terms, we understand what he was saying.

1. the rich - as the term is promulgated by Democrats - are in actuality the small business owner

2. real rich people - the super-wealthy one percent - such as Heinz-Kerry, use legal tax loopholes to avoid taxes (anyway)

But why just not use this as another opportunity to execute a favorite rhetorical exercise or three?

__________________
create evolution

kutulu

The super wealthy one percent are not just those like Heinz Kerry. People making somwhere a little more than 300k are in the top 1%. It's very misleading to try to depict someone making that much money as some struggling small business owner.

phyzix525

I think this may be the one thread that has turned me off completly to the TFP. I just can't believe that there are so many people in this country that can't understand simple economics. I thought the people here at the TFP were smarter. ART, and MATT thank you, you seem to be the only ones here that have not been mind controlled by the anti bush hating liberals.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

kutulu

lol, I consider myself a bush hating liberal!

sailor

Care to explain yourself, or just bash other members?

While Im not a fan of Bush (and must therefore be a "bush hating liberal", which I proudly am), I think this quote has been taken out of context. I dont support Bush's economic policies, but I think this really was just a rather innocent statement taken out of context. Sure, when you isolate it, it looks horrible, but in the context of the statement, its not the worst thing ever.

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

phyzix525

I am so tired of people not thinking, and just accepting something as truth cause it is anti bush.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

shakran

I'd love to be enlightened by our resident econ professor. So far, in two out of two posts you've hurled insults but haven't managed to say anything clever. Are you going to go for a hat trick, or are you going to explain what you're talking about?

ARTelevision

He was talking about the super wealthy - sorry, I meant to say "less than one percenters, such as Heinz Kerry"

The point remains the same.

__________________
create evolution

sailor

See, in my view, I see people accepting what the government tells them is good because they arent thinking. Taking anything at face value is no good--and that includes pro-bush sentiment as well. That door swings both ways.

Im with Shakran on this one--two posts in a row that have done nothing but hurl insults. Shape it up, please.

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

phyzix525

that is the point I am trying to make, matt and Art both have tried, but nobody is willing to listen.

Everything that I have seen from other who disagree have not come up with anything that would work, they would rather just criticize. which leads me to believe that they are not independent thinkers and are just spouting anti-bush rhetoric.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

Kadath

Here is where he said it:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html

The very bottom of the page, the appendix. He's cutting out the top bracket, so you pay the same marginal rate(well, less, actually) if you make 137,000/152,000/166,500 (depending on filing status) or 300,000. Great if you make a lot of money. True, you get a break in the other brackets too -- except you don't. Hey, thanks for shifting that first friggin' bracket to half the poverty level! That's useful! No break for what used to be the first bracket, and split the difference on the next two brackets, so the 27K-65K group get a three percent cut and the 65K-137K get a 6 percent cut -- as does the top bracket.

THAT'S "not taxing the rich", my friend. You lose, I win -- try again.

__________________
it's quiet in here

phyzix525

Of course it does and just cause it has come from the government is not the reason that I believe that it is true. I feel that it is true because it makes good economical sence. I am just pointing out that opposers are against it cause the president says it is good. they don't oppose it because it does not make bad economic sence but only cause the president supports it.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

sailor

Please, enlighten us. I havent seen any suggestions here...

The Kerry tax plan the discussion was talking about suggested repealing the Bush tax cut because we are sitting on the largest deficit in history--something that came about after a rather large surplus four years ago, I remind you. That doesnt leave me very pleased with Bush's economic policies, and I agree that we should repeal the tax cuts as part of a plan to get the deficit under control. Bottom line, Im not an econ professor (I am an intro Econ major, though ), but I realize that going from a large surplus to a tremendous deficit in the span of a couple years isnt the greatest plan in the world, and that destroys any confidence I may have had in the Bush administration's ability to handle money. It feels wierd feeling that one needs to vote Democrat to put someone in office who can handle money, but thats the way I see it this election year.

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

sailor

EDIT: Sorry, hit submit twice

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

phyzix525

thats not "not taxing the rich" that is just a bigger tax break for people who make more cause right now they pay more % wise then people with lesser incomes. Its called evening things out.

And as for Kerry's plan of increasing the tax on the rich and lowering for the middle class you would be worse off then you were now that your low income tax braket are paying even less and the high tax bracket are avoiding taxes by being smart. therefore not decreasing the deficit. trickle down economics people.

Socialism at its best, stealing from the rich to give to the poor.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

sailor

OK, now we get some suggestions

Personally, I think a large part of trickle down economics is bullshit. Giving affluent people more money doesnt often make life better for those with less money, just those who got the benefits in the first place. It has a small part in a larger economic plan, but alone, or even as a major part? No go.

And as for socialism, a bit of it is a good thing. Don't necessarily think a bit of helping fellow man is a bad thing. I by no means support total redistribution of wealth, thats also a load of junk. But I do think that those with means have a bit of a moral obligation to do what they can to help those that arent so fortunate.

The world isnt so cut and dry as you like to present it. As someone who likes to tout his economics, you should know that

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

phyzix525

Well this is going off topic, but yes helping your fellow man is good, but it depends on how you do it. As my father once told me "the difference between a liberal and a conservative is a liberal would like to give a man a fish everyday for the rest of his life, whereas a conservative would rather teach the man how to fish so he can support himself."

I know it is an old saying but I think it makes sence.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

sailor

OK, the concept of that saying is good. I dont agree with the labels presented on it--I am of the opinion that liberality is something that we all owe to fellow man, and doing more to paint it in a negative light, as well as casting such stereotypes, does nothing to help it. But, I agree with the point.

Im assuming that what you are getting at is welfare. Yes, welfare is broken. Yes, it needs to be fixed. But in my experience (which is admittedly rather limited, but still valid), I have seen conservatives try to abolish it repeatedly, without offering to replace it with anything better. It is a concept that I think we need--even you said, the idea is a good thing. Getting rid of it completely is selfish and ignorant. In my experience, that conservative teaching them how has really been more of a way of making them feel good while simultaneously getting rid of every social program on the books.

Like I said, I think that those with means have a moral obligation to help those without. Not to give them the fish every day, but to help them get out of the bottom of the barrel. They dont have to dedicate their lives to it or anything as drastic, but I do think that a small part of their paycheck should be going towards that end. Its a lofty goal that I think everyone can respect. Killing social programs off one by one, as I so often see conservatives attempting to do, is a selfish and immoral way to go about it. No good.

I also dont see why the word "liberal" has such a negative connotation. Don't forget, this country was founded on liberal concepts, the constitution was written with liberal concepts, and the whole reason this country exists is because other nations were too embroiled in their own intolerant and rather conservative beliefs. Liberality is a good thing.

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

clockworkgreen

My father always said, "Teach a man to spell and chances are he'll forget how while trying to make enlightened points."

phyzix525

liberality and someone that is labled a "liberal" are two different things. most things are good in moderation, and in the recent past "liberals" have taken their idea of liberality too far. for example MM recent bablings of how osma may not be a "bad" guy. and opposing the Patiot Act that is ment to keep us protected. don't forget that the democrats of past where more like republicans compaired to todays democrats. (see ronald reagan a previous democrat) they have just gone too far left.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

phyzix525

I am a damned poor speller. Its an ADD thing, I can't type fast enough to keep up with my thoughts.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

phyzix525

I am not for disapating the welfare program, just revamping it, its just that there may be no good way to give people free money cause it just makes them dependent and lazy. (of course there are always the few exceptions.)

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

sailor

Calling Osama a good guy is absurd. But yeah, I definitely oppose the patriot act in its current form. It is entirely too broad in scope. The idea is good, the implementation is horrible. Trading your liberty for a bit of protection is very shortsighted. If you want to bring terrorism into it, thats exactly what they want--get us to change our ways. Ben Franklin said it best: "He who would give up a little liberty in return for a little security deserves neither liberty nor security."

And todays Democrats really now have more of the core Republican beliefs than the Republicans themselves. Can we say smaller government? How about fiscal control? Whats your point?

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

Kadath

Well, now we've really moved off topic, haven't we? And the rest of your post is just a diatribe about the unfairness of the progressive tax system -- something you're going to have to learn to live with. Bush is significantly cutting the tax burden of the rich and no one else; whether that's fair or not is not something we're going to agree on.

__________________
it's quiet in here

phyzix525

yeah sort of, I know the recent terrorist attacks have made the republicans wanting larger gorvernment envolvement. they are not for bigger governement overall. As for fiscal control, the only reason this is a point this year is because of the deficit that was created by the dot com bust and 9-11 and of course the war. spending increases and tax income decreases with poor a economy create a large deficit that is not really something the president could have avoided unless taxing the shit out of everyone. which I don't think anyone wants.

And as for my point you were saying that our country was founded by liberal ideas, well those people were mostly considered republican by todays standards.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

phyzix525

Hold on a sec, I am easliy considered lower middle class. I am self employed and I had to pay the entire amount of social security tax that people who work for someone else has half of it paid for them and yet I managed to actually get money back. I actually "made" money on my taxes. So what are you suggesting? Am I paying too much cause I am lower middle class? Is raising the taxes on the rich while I pay nothing fair??

Do I really need more of a tax break?

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time

Kadath

phyzix, I am not suggesting anything. The numbers in the chart on the whitehouse.gov website state very clearly who is getting the larger cut of the tax break Bush is attempting to pass. Like I said previously(actually immediately after your crop point), we disagree on whether that is a good thing(or, if you like, whether or not you need more of a tax break); there can be no disagreement on the numbers.

Also, you only "made" money on your taxes if you got more money back in refund than you paid in originally -- not very likely.

__________________
it's quiet in here

MSD

I'd rather go for the middle ground and give the man a fish a day as long as he's trying to learn to fish.

The PATRIOT Act made me nervous at first. I was certain that there was potential for abuse, and I hoped that it would not be abused. Then, one day, I mentioned, while on the phone, that I felt the president had committed impeachable offenses. I immediately heard a click, and a hollow sound consistent with a phone tap kicking in. Since then, I hear the same click and hollow sound, and sometimes even whispering voices when I talk on my cell phone. It never happened before that.

Sorry to get off track, but I felt that I should respond to that. To return to the topic, Bush did make a comment indicating that he feels the rich evade taxes and that the small business owners get hit hardest. As I would expect of a typical economically conservative person, he fels that this is caused by unfair (liberal) taxes, and would probably be happier with a flat tax. I feel that everyone in this country is taxed too heavily. I feel that anyone who makes under $7000 per person per household (I believe that is defined as the "poverty line") should pay a 3% income tax, and that anyone who makes more than that should pay 5% or 6%. In additio, a 3% federal sales tax would also be added to purchases. To deal with the lower income, many government functions should be privatized, and others made more efficient. Bush is cutting the tax burden mainly for the rich, while he should be cutting taxes for everyone.

shakran

Well hell! Is THAT all you want? Why didn't you say so. Here ya go.


Do what Clinton did.

Cut pork

Knock it off with giving the wealthy tax advantages that A) the non-wealthy don't have and B) the wealthy certainly don't need.


let's look at it this way.

Let's say we follow your plan and run a flat tax rate across the board. Let's set it at 50% because that makes the math really easy.

Now let's say that I make $200,000 a year and you make $20,000 a year.

After taxes, I'm sitting around with $100,000 to live on for the whole year. You, on the other hand, have $10,000. Who's gonna starve?

See, people love to say that a flat tax is fair and that the percentage is the number you want to look at. Those people are either economically deficient or they're heartless bastards. Take your pick. You can't look at the percentage that the government takes from you, you have to look at the end result.

If the end result means that certain people's lifestyles are not materially different with the tax than they would be without the tax, while other people's lifestyles are radically different with than without the tax, then something is broken and needs fixing.

If you have $20,000 to live on for the whole year, money may be tight (depending on where you live, it may be REALLY tight) but assuming you don't live in a big city you can probably get by. If you've only got $10,000 for the year, you're gonna be in the poorhouse. Your lifestyle has radically changed from being self sufficient to being dependent on financial assistance from someone (probably the government)

If you have $200,000 to live on for the whole year, you're sitting pretty. You can get pretty much anythign you need or want. If you've only got $100,000 for the whole year, you're still sitting pretty. You can get pretty much anything you need and most of the things you want (assuming you don't want stupid shit like a helicopter) Your lifestyle is not materially changed.


Yes, this is a simplistic model, but it illustrates the inequities brought about by a flat tax system.

On the other hand, the wealthy have used the resources made available to them by this country and, in fact, its system of government to make scads of money. Why should you not give more of it back than the person that has not been as fortunate as you?

phyzix525

well personally I don't want a flat tax system, I was just mentioning that yeah it may be a 6% decrease but thats cause they are at a higher % to begin with. I would like to see no income tax at all and go with a higher sales tax. I have looked into that a bit and I think it would make sence.

__________________
It's hard to remember we're alive for the first time
It's hard to remember we're alive for the last time
It's hard to remember to live before you die
It's hard to remember that our lives are such a short time
It's hard to remember when it takes such a long time