Top 20% of Americans Will Pay 87% of Income Tax

No it's not. Capital without labor is relatively ineffective. Think of it this way, you have a billion dollars in the bank. You want to turn it into 2 billion dollars. How do you do it? The only way is to put that money through a process that involves labor. That is, paying someone else to do work. Labor is needed to add value to capital. Without it, that money can't grow. It's not backwards at all, it's the basic tenant of economics.

Not true, I can "get a job" doing anything. I can "get a job" growing my own food and thus providing for myself. Humans survived as labor long before capital and labor were created terms to define what it is. YOU have simply subscribed to the theory put forth by those with money, that they create and we all owe them our thanks/allegiance. We don't. Your employer has no more power than anyone else, they just need someone to do the work they don't want to do so they can make more money. That's not a pejorative statement, it's just a reality.

 

Yes it is.

Without Capital, there would be no jobs.

 

What do you think subsistence farming was? Why do you think so many early Americans made their own clothes? The lack of capital means one doesn't have the means to pay someone ELSE to work for them is all. But if you think capital is required in order for labor to exist, you are wrong. What I don't get is why you think that. Does it threaten some cherished belief of yours? The first humans had no capital. But they did labor, didn't they? If all capital disappeared tomorrow we might lose the jobs we have today, but society wouldn't end. It would just be different. Why? Because no matter what, I can always do work, even if it's for myself, to either attain a good or service I need. That's been the basic way of people since day 1.

 

You fail to notice which came first in your scenario........the capital. Its called supply side.

 

Everyone doesn't need to pay taxes to have skin in controlling expenditutres.
People of all incomes and tax brackets can care about how money is spent.

 

Of course there would be. There were jobs long before there was money.
People need to eat, have a place to live, and have other basic needs met. All of that can be done without money, but can't be done without labor.

 

Wrong, resources are all that's needed to live.
Live off the land, make shelter from the resources, make clothes from resources.
How do you think people lived more than 300 yrs ago, before money/capital.

 

Yes they do.

No they don't.

$21T in debt is a lot to service, but, if 20% of American's pay 87% of the taxes, then 80% of us are only servicing 13% of it. And of those 80% 2/3rds pay no income tax at all, so what the hell do they care? They service none of the debt. The only way they feel an effect is if tax receipts go down due to program cuts for them, so they always want more tax revenue in order to increase social safety net funding.

Everyone needs skin in the game.
Everyone needs to feel it, when government spending increases.
That increases the sense of community.

 

Money or no money, people don't do things for free.

When there is no money involved, then bartering is involved. It's called trading or returning a favor.

 

They care because the live here. They care because it's their country. They care because they may have a family that they want better things for.
There's a whole host or reason's they care.
To make a blanket statement that they are low income and always want to remain low income so will only vote for more and more programs is short sighted. Basically RW BS rhetoric.

 

There was a time when people did everything for free, there was no money.
People from an area would all get together and build a house for their neighbors. Sure it wasn't free, for each would go to the next neighbor and help build. So the exchange was labor for labor, as you said bartering.
But suppose there was a fire and a house or barn burned down. Many times there was a gathering of neighbors who chipped in to rebuild with no thought of anything in return.
And then there were always those who just wanted to do things for themselves.

In my life, I did many things for free. Especially as a teenager. I helped my Uncle in summers make hay. Never got paid. We did such things because it was family with no expectation of getting any money.


Bottom line though, is labor is required. Period.

 

And that is why they have a duty, just like the rest of us, to get a shoulder under the load. It builds community.

 

Good stuff. That kind of group participation and sense of community is exactly what we need to work to re-establish.

 

They do, in localities.
As has been brought up ad nauseam, there's a plethora of consumption taxes, local taxes, state taxes, excise taxes. All which take a bigger % of the lower incomes wages.
So there's plenty of skin in the game.

 

No
None of those tax streams service the National Debt. Everyone in this nation has a duty to help service the National Debt. Now Proportionally, to be sure, the wealthy pay far more, but EVERYONE needs to chip in. There are a large number of benefits to living here. Sure we bitch about everything, but, we have it pretty good, and when we collectively decide we are going to borrow and spend more money, everyone needs to share in the cost of the debt service. This is something we are doing TOGETHER. You know the sense of pride one feels by chipping in, we all need to have that, it builds community.

 

Spending money and living in the economy will service the debt.
Money spent at the Wal marts goes to their profits, which their taxes can be used to service the debt.
All the sales taxes they pay goes to the state. Which gives the states more money so they can rely less on fed gov't.

 

Um, are you so completely clueless you don't know WalMart has costs associated with running their business? If you think all money spent at WalMart is profit you have never been involved in any business in any capacity.

 

Major difference between Democrats and Republicans boils down to this question.
Are we here to serve the Government or is the Government here to serve us.
We say it is here to serve us. We are to control it rather than the other way around. Democrats laws show me they intend it to control us. Gun control issues proves again they believe in Government managing our lives.

This will not stand. Trump is on our side.

 

Not really. A barter system isn't the same what people are talking here. No one had capital first without working for it. That is, they were their own labor. They went out and harvested firewood. That took labor. Their own. Now they had that wood, they could barter it for something. But labor came first as it always does. Ask anyone who started their own business. Sorry, labor is required to have capital. It's OK to admit it.

 

No really, in your scenario you started out with a billion dollars in the bank, capital.

 

Did magic create that billion dollars...? Where did it come from? Tell me how someone makes money like that. They invest in labor. Maybe indirectly if say their daddy loans them 12 million dollars or so, but still, they are investing in something that labor is working on. Building a house let's say and then loaning someone the money to buy it is all about labor, from building the house to drawing up the paperwork. That's labor

 

Your post is devoid of an understanding of service. Service is when you pay someone (in modern times, slaves and servants are long gone) and they do something to support you. How does the "small government" model you claim to cherish serve anyone? It provides weak to no infrastructure and it says you provide for yourself. That's not service at all.

Sorry, you have it backwards.

 

This is the classic stance by Democrats. Serving us, as I lamented means to actually serve us. Democrats idea of service is a huge layer of laws. Give you a good example. Dodd Frank is a law many assume served us. But it put many out of business. Who then serves us? Those fewer who can afford to stay in business. Democrats drove many out of business. Small Government has long served in areas such as counties and they still have roads.

 

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed in our at-will employment State, would ensure full employment of capital resources.