Rand Paul - Don't Raise Taxes, Cut Spending

You just keep telling yourself that.

 

There's a war on poverty?

 

You would not know it by the results but exists.

Think of all the welfare programs designed to wipe every nose and you will find it there.

 

House Republicans would spooge their pants for the deal of Clinton taxes for Clinton spending. Are you kidding me? Let's go. Make it happen.

 

The KC Royals could win several consecutive world series titles if you killed everyone from 19-33 on all the other teams.

 

But that is not a war on poverty, it is called lack of personal responsibility at the lowest level in our society, the collective individual.

 

Johnson called it a war when he started it.

And since that time no one has signed a truce to end it.

 

In the 1992 electons, I was for George Bush Sr. But when Clinton was president, I was surprised, and glad to see a president who knew something about foreign policy. His Oslo Accords and his 1997 Asia Financial Reform were his hallmark in foreign policy. His domestic agenda for me was mixed. But overall, he deserves a lot more credit than he has received thus far.

 

That is true, but politicians will call anything a war as long as it can be passed and kept going.

 

I don't suppose you see the irony.

 

This illustrates perfectly why I like Rand Paul. He sat there and in one minute detailed multiple compromises that don't require anyone to compromise on their actual principles, just on the execution of them.

Further cementing the fact that he may just get me to vote Republican in 2016.

 

Small business owners and the average American worker are the most productive people in America. Investors that invest in money markets, hedge funds, and stocks don't produce anything.

They're not even investing in the corporation when they purchase a stock. They're merely switching ownership from one person to another person and the corporation doesn't receive any funding from their investments. People have this stupid idea that purchasing a share in a company is actually investing in the corporation but it's not. That share in the company is already owned and all that's happening is a name-change of the owner. "John Doe" purchase the stock from "Joe Smith" and not from the corporation. Whether John Doe or Joe Smith owns the corporation doesn't matter to the corporation. The name on the stock certificate has no meaning to the corporation.

Every taxpayer should pay the same rate on the same dollars earned and under the earned income tax tables they do. While we have four categories for filing (single, married filing jointly, married filing separately, and head of household) we can provide an example taking one of those categories so let's look at married filing jointly.

Every married couple filing jointly pays 10% on net income between $0 – $17,400 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 15% on net income between $17,401 – $70,700 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 25% on net income between $70,701 – $142,700 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 28% on net income between $142,701 – $217,450 plus (Medicare) FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 33% on net income between $217,451 – $388,350 plus (Medicare) FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 35% on net income above $388,351 plus (Medicare) FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.

Everyone pays the identical rates on the identical income EXCEPT INVESTORS THAT PAY ONLY 15% ON ALL INCOME UNDER THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX AND ZERO IN FICA/PAYROLL TAXES.

My postion has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone is rich or not as wealth is not the criteria I'm using. My position is that everyone should pay the identical income tax rates on all income regardless of whether they're rich or not. All gross income subject to FICA/Payroll taxes and net income should be taxed identically under our tax codes. A dollar is a dollar and there is no differnce in how income is obtained whether it's by a person digging a ditch or investing in Microsoft stocks. The dollar is still a dollar and should be taxed under the same tax rates for all Americans.

 

Small business owners and the average American worker are the most productive people in America. Investors that invest in money markets, hedge funds, and stocks don't produce anything.

They're not even investing in the corporation when they purchase a stock. They're merely switching ownership from one person to another person and the corporation doesn't receive any funding from their investments. People have this stupid idea that purchasing a share in a company is actually investing in the corporation but it's not. That share in the company is already owned and all that's happening is a name-change of the owner. "John Doe" purchase the stock from "Joe Smith" and not from the corporation. Whether John Doe or Joe Smith owns the corporation doesn't matter to the corporation. The name on the stock certificate has no meaning to the corporation.

Every taxpayer should pay the same rate on the same dollars earned and under the earned income tax tables they do. While we have four categories for filing (single, married filing jointly, married filing separately, and head of household) we can provide an example taking one of those categories so let's look at married filing jointly.

Eevery married couple filing jointly pays 10% on net income between $0 – $17,400 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 15% on net income between $17,401 – $70,700 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 25% on net income between $70,701 – $142,700 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 28% on net income between $142,701 – $217,450 plus (Medicare) FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 33% on net income between $217,451 – $388,350 plus (Medicare) FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.
Every married couple filing jointly pays 35% on net income above $388,351 plus FICA/Payroll taxes on gross income except investors that pay only 15% on all income under the Capital Gains tax and zero in FICA/Payroll taxes.

Everyone pays the identical rates on the identical income EXCEPT INVESTORS THAT PAY ONLY 15% ON ALL INCOME UNDER THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX AND ZERO IN FICA/PAYROLL TAXES.

My postion has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone is rich or not as wealth is not the criteria I'm using. My position is that everyone should pay the identical income tax rates on all income regardless of whether they're rich or not. All gross income subject to FICA/Payroll taxes and net income should be taxed identically under our tax codes. A dollar is a dollar and there is no differnce in how income is obtained whether it's by a person digging a ditch or investing in Microsoft stocks. The dollar is still a dollar and should be taxed under the same tax rates for all Americans.

 

Wrong again.

To the contrary, I have frequently and continuously called for cuts in spending along with tax increases as a balanced approached to get the deficits down.

 

Look it up and get back to us and then you can tell us your conclusion.

 

And still conservatives would make their false claim that higher taxes would kill the economy.

 

My point is that receipts as a percentage of GDP would go up while deficits decreased. And without laying off more workers, if you tax the right people.

If the economy grows, while taxes increase, deficits will decrease as well.

Partisan based nonsense. Revenues = effective tax * gross income. Increase the effective tax and you increase the revenues for a give level of gross income.

 

And if rich capitalists decide to invest their money in China and pay no taxes to the US government what will you do?

In a capitalist economy investors are the canary in the coal mine.

They are usually far smarter than the sleepy government employee in the Department of Commerce and they are far better qualified to decide the best use for their money than the government is.

BTW: I like your information about taxes and get your point that even the rich pay the same rate as the poor on the first $17,400.

Except that they don't since the poor normally get all their money back plus an extra subsidy in the form of the unEarned Income Tax Credit.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to explain who Paul's plan to cut spending and cut taxes, which will result in the 1% having more money to hoard in their offshore bank accounts and more people in the unemployment lines, is going to help the economy grow.

 

Why should the rich want to hoard money offshore instead of investing in the good old USA?

If greedy libs were not waiting to pounce on them like hungry vultures the rich would be more than happy to do business in the US again.

 

Because they are concerned about how the economy is doing. Not enough spending and thus demand for further investment. Classic prisoner's dilemma.

Thanks for sharing your biased opinions. But I was really looking for someone who could address my question:


I'm still waiting for someone to explain who Paul's plan to cut spending and cut taxes, which will result in the 1% having more money to hoard in their offshore bank accounts and more people in the unemployment lines, is going to help the economy grow.

 

And yet when I called for the same, you accused my proposal of being a job killer to the millions.

 

I am biased toward common sense.

If the rich prefer to send their money out of the country the class-envy libs are doing something wrong.

 

They've always done that, though.

 

They will do it as long as America looks like a bad investment.

And America will not look very promising as long as anti-capitalist libs are in power.