Why is the only solution proposed by the left soaking the rich.

OK let's do this quickly as I do have a meeting soon...see...I work for a living...

First..."equintles" is not a word.
Please try to stick to actual English.

Now...it is a proven fact that since roughly the time of Nixon, Republicans have been actively chopping away at the benefits the middle-class had from The New Deal. Freedman openly declared a philosophical war on The New Deal and all social spending. Unfortunately, every time a tax-cut was tried, it had to be repealed because it caused a cash shortage in the government. This happened to Nixon, it happened to Reagan and it happened to Bush I. This time the Republicans and their T-Bagging leash-holders are fighting this correction tooth and nail...and its hurting the economy.

How does this revenue help the average middle-class family? Do you like to drive? Do you like to send your kids to school? How about social nets...if you got laid-off, wouldn't it be nice to be able to feed yourself while you look for another job?

All these government funded programs enhance over all cash flow. And cash flow enhances demand...which in turn enhanced supply. We've been over this one...but you insist on trying to argue from a rather nonsensical stand point that produces nothing but...well your argument actually produces nothing.

I'm not surprised that you don't get it. Bet you Daddy would...But hey...who am I kidding...MissJonelyn cares about MissJonelyn...

As for how taxes benefit me or you or your Daddy for that matter...see above.

OK if Tea helps brain activity, then I must assume you now understand how taxes benefit everyone in a society. How they enhance lives and the quality of life for all.

See, this is not about punishing anyone...its about maintaining the federal budget, providing a more stable middle-class (which every economy is supported by) and enhancing the quality of life FOR ALL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY...of which even T-Baggers are members of...although they seem to forget that...

Now have another cup-o' and let me know when that ol' brain activity kicks in.

 

It's a typo. Relax. You wouldn't know what an income quintile was if I spelled it correctly.

Why do we have so many benefits but so few jobs?

Tax cuts don't get repealed because of a shortage in the government. If they were true, no one would ever run deficit spending. Learn how federal budgets work.

Tax revenue has historically increased revenue because taxes were lowered.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/HistoricalTables[1].pdf

Try again.

Nixon didn't lower taxes. The tax rates were at the same rates when they were left from the Linden B Johnson years, when Kennedy lowered taxes. Bush 41 increased taxes, not lowered them. You spent all this time researching for a simple rebuttal and you still have no idea what you are talking about.

Take the time to actually look things but before you type. You'll sound like you actually know what you're talking about.

So higher taxes only benefit people if they are on welfare, unemployment and kids who attend American failing public schools.

How does government funded programs create demand and enhance supply

Methinks you should actually take the time to learn how supply and demand works. Government funded programs don't create a demand for anything. If there is a demand, the public will want it and know of it through prices. If the government has to allocate resources through prices then there isn't a demand. Goods in general, the quantity supplied varies directly with the price, just as the quantity demand varies inversely with the price.

Do you know how prices work?

Again, what does my daddy have to do with anything.

Yes, taxes would benefit my father if he was unemployed or on welfare. Thanks, I'll be sure to let him know.

I had no idea that 90 percent of the country is on welfare.

Why is the federal budget not maintained? We bring in 2 trillion dollars a year.

How is this happening through government spending? It's not.

Thanks for this. I needed a laugh. Economic illiterates kill me.

 

The simple answer is "it hurts you more than helps you."

By increasing taxation of the wealthy, Obama and company are attempting to justify the costs associated with INCREASING social spending without adding to the deficit.
It's a house of cards game because they fail to see the consequences of their actions.

The "whole plan" involves keeping social spending programs at higher levels and paying off even more Solandyra-esque companies to waste even more of our money.

Was Steve Jobs privleged? Was Donald Trump privleged? You make an awfully big assumption when you neglect self-made million and billionaires.

 

Yawn, only idiots believe that the whores in government are gonna stick it to the corporatists that own them.

So you are either a political whore, a corporatist with a vested interest is shifting your tax burden to the upper middle class, or an idiot
I'll let you make the call.

 

what makes you think that the political whores in office are gonna "stick it" to the same folks who they also shower with privilege ?
Ain't gonna happen.

 

I notice you edited you original post...lol

Yer right about Bush I, He only raised them more after Reagan

You were saying something about looking at things...
Nice try...

Yer not as sharp as you thought you were...are ya...

 

The military is the one place that shouldn't be cut.

 

Yes I do that when I add in more information which pretty much makes someone look dumber than humanely possible.

And those "stimulative tax cuts" weren't on income earners. The tax rates were the same as they were during the Kennedy years with slight changes to the top quintle earners because he increased taxes and then lowered them back to the levels of the Kennedy years. The only types of taxes which changed were capital gains.

That's what I said. Your point?

Info please the hall mark of economic illiterates like yourself

I still await an answer as to how tax increases benefit people who aren't on welfare or unemployment.

 

Because the rich have all the money ?

Spending must be cut as well, including military spending, but it rediculous for corporations (Think GE) and individuals making billions of dollars to pay little or no taxes.

 

Do you not understand? We used to have a publicly owned bus service. You bought a return ticket for the number 43 bus and guess what? When a 43 bus came you could use your ticket on it! I know! Incredible innit?

Then Thatcher privatised it to keep people like you happy.

Have you forgotten to take your pills? What are you on about?

Efficient in various useful ways:

1. Eliminate unemployment and underemployment. This alone would increase the effective American workforce by about nearly 30% I reckon, as the real unemplyment figure is 22% and many self employed oe part time workers are underemployed.

2. Eliminate useless jobs like marketing and arms manufacture. Sack all the bankers, speculators, traders, sales people. Let them do something useful.

3. Gain economies of scale, avoid duplication. Obviously there would still be choice and things would be done in different ways to see what worked best. For instance drugs research would be shared not duplicated in secret.

4. Production to what is useful to the majority, not what a few people can afford. So, no $1 billion private yachts, more things needed by billions of people.

5. End patents etc, so all inventions are available to the whole of humanity.

6. Run R&D institutes, directed by boards which decide on what to research and what to implement. This gets round the problems the Russians had of getting innovation implemented by factory managers. Keep enough slack in the system to enable innovation implementation.

7. Socialism relies on the shop floor to use as much initiative as possible. It need a massive extension of democracy. People would be involved in planning at various levels. Ultimately everyone would be involved at all levels, so there would be no worker/politician differentiation. This helps with efficiency and motivation. The factory floor knows what the factory floor needs.

8. A planned economy by definition is planned. Nowadays we can plan for efficiency. The capitalist system cannot do that.

9. Capitalists dont factor in external costs. A car manufacturer does not pay for road repairs, accidents, global warming, pollution, congestion and the depletion of vital resources.

10. Socialism could go green very quickly. Capitalism cannot. Everyone on the planet wants to live like an American and are encouraged to want to, but this would take more than 5 planet earths. It just isnt possible.

11. End the capitalist cycle of boom (fake, based on credit) and bust (real, recessions cause real harm and devastate lives, needlessly).

12. End the dependence on profit, money and markets. These cost millions of lives, cause recessions. Wars even. The market means that when people are hungry, food prices go up. This is the insanity of the system.

 

Sure, I have an eye disease, 5th leading cause of preventable blindness in the USA. My treatment costs more than I earn. But I get it free and it stops me going blind.

I had a private policy because I am self employed. One drug they put me on made me ill for a few months.

Did the private policy pay out?

Did it buggery

 

This post makes no sense. Tax the rich more, the poor less. Tax the rich till the pips squeak.

This is even more stupid than MissJ's post. Congratualtions. New heights of stupidity.

Scrolls thread. yawn, same old.

 

Because you're an economic illiterate. The poor don't pay any taxes already. Now start an argument with someone who doesn't know anything. It's for the best for you in the long run.

Again, how does it benefit them unless they are on welfare or unemployment?

 

Without weapons how will your force people to comply with your laws?

Why do we need a larger workforce?

"Useful"? For what?

Define "need", and "useful" yet again.

 

Speaking of the dumbest post ever this is definitely one of them. This reasoning is the Foster Child of exponential grow. Leave it to the socialist to not know how prices and efficiency works.

But I guess there is no room for that to work in your Socialist rhetoric.

Now take your nonsense else where.

 

My words being labled "stupid" by a bitter collectivist is validation of their truthfulness.

Thank you.

 

Scrapping useless jobs? China didn't use excavators for years, because they said it killed jobs. Let's give them a spoon then.

The more you tax the rich, the less jobs there are going to be. The rich are allready taxed at 60-80% for god's sake. I make less than $100,000 a year and I pay 50% of my income in taxes, for god's sake. And revenue goes DOWN not up, when you factor in the economic regress from over-burden taxes.

Public enterprises are all broke, what in the hell are you talking about? A private enterprise can grow, a public enterprise has to take money forcefully to grow.

Central planning has never worked, and never will. It attempts to control the market, when the market controls itself. What works for 5 years in central planning, fails at 6 years by a market correction. Look at greece, portugal, spain, italy. They are all broke, they tax the rich, their economy lost steam, and thus their revenues went down.

 

Can you elaborate?

 

Taxation itself is intrinsically unfair. I much prefer government-by-bake-sale.

 

What's that mean?

 

Taxation is extortion. If the government wants to get something done it should make money itself, accept donations, or get investors.

Plus I like bake sales, cakes and pies and tarts oh my!

 

What makes you think that Government can effectively run a bake sale?

Why do you want Government to spend resources competing against mom and pop bakeries?

 

If they can't do that what business do they have collecting taxes?

They don't have to if they don't want to, but it would be a much better use of resources than bullets.

 

I don't not know what you are asking me.

I just want to know what can Government do which can be just as effective as a regular business.

But I like bullets. Governments don't make bullets. Or do they...Hm.

 

I don't know, but if there isn't anything it shouldn't exist.