Democraps on taxes. Too much will never be enough.

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

This war on women from RIU libs is disturbing.

Big men picking on women, well done. Smack a bitch if she don't know her role eh? Make your momma proud.

Pretty standard fare.

All for gay rights, but will call you gay in a derogatory manner.

Will say you're a bigot while displaying bigotry themselves.

All for women's rights but will degrade a woman at the drop of a hat if they disagree.

Stupid is as stupid does- Forrest Gump's momma

 

[Trousers]

The Republicans and the Democrats are proposing a 51% tax on weed in Denver. Fuck those dirty bitches.

Under Democrats, man exploits man.
Under Republicans it is the other way around.




[video=youtube;D5gXRPXs0PQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5gXRPXs0PQ[/video]


Which party do you prefer, the Giant Douches or the Turd Sandwiches?

 

[ChesusRice]

The Republicans and the Democrats are proposing a 51% tax on weed in Denver. Fuck those dirty bitches.

Under Democrats, man exploits man.
Under Republicans it is the other way around.


Which party do you prefer, the Giant Douches or the Turd Sandwiches?

Hey what did you expect when they made it legal to sell

 

[nontheist]

our middle class was strongest when our taxation was most progressive.

ever since zombie worshippers with silly ideas about trickle down voodoo made the tax code less progressive, the middle class started to shrink.

that's a fact.

Your red star is shining brightly today Bucky. You know you shouldn't take offense to people calling you out as a commie when you keep quoting Marxist ideology.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

You'll never get out of debt because it's mathematically totally impossible.

 

[FreedomWorks]

Your red star is shining brightly today Bucky. You know you shouldn't take offense to people calling you out as a commie when you keep quoting Marxist ideology.

The part that cracks me up most about buck is he calls himself a Capitalist.

 

[FreedomWorks]

ever since zombie worshippers with silly ideas about trickle down voodoo .

I've never heard of trickle down voodoo before. I am familiar with the term "trickle down tyranny", or "trickle up poverty" if you prefer.

 

[tokeprep]

You'll never get out of debt because it's mathematically totally impossible.

That's certainly not true.

 

[UncleBuck]

Your red star is shining brightly today Bucky. You know you shouldn't take offense to people calling you out as a commie when you keep quoting Marxist ideology.

there ya go.

when you can't dispute the factuality of what your opponent says, just call him a communist, baselessly.

at least when i point out what a bigot you are or what a racist someone else is, it is based in fact.

the fact is that the middle class started shrinking and the gap between the wealthy and the greese trap monkeys like you started to diverge when our tax code became less progressive. deficits and debt also piled up like no other.

all your baseless accusations of "communist!!!!!" will not change the past, bigot.

 

[nontheist]

there ya go.

when you can't dispute the factuality of what your opponent says, just call him a communist, baselessly.

at least when i point out what a bigot you are or what a racist someone else is, it is based in fact.

the fact is that the middle class started shrinking and the gap between the wealthy and the greese trap monkeys like you started to diverge when our tax code became less progressive. deficits and debt also piled up like no other.

all your baseless accusations of "communist!!!!!" will not change the past, bigot.

You accuse me of baseless accusations and your reply with more Marx rhetoric lol. I highlighted expecting you to be too incompetent to see it.

 

[tokeprep]

the fact is that the middle class started shrinking and the gap between the wealthy and the greese trap monkeys like you started to diverge when our tax code became less progressive. deficits and debt also piled up like no other.

Alright, let's try to make this point with some graphs.

This is the top statutory tax rate over time:

This is the effectivetax rate over time for various income groups:

Note that at the beginning of the second graph, the top earners are literally paying a fraction of the statutory rate. Even when the statutory rate was almost halved, there was relatively little impact on the effective tax rate. Now focus on the bottom 60% of taxpayers. Since 1979, the bottom quintile's effective tax rate has been reduced to 0; the next lowest quintile saw its effective rate halved; and the middle quintile, likewise, saw its effective tax rate almost halved.

You're going to have to look for another explanation for that wealth gap, because the tax code doesn't explain it (at best, drawing on this data, the tax code could only possibly explain only a fraction of the gap). I've already repeated the real explanation many times: we the people, the poor, middle class, and wealthy alike, concentrated wealth by shifting our purchasing power to large national business interests, away from independent, regional, and local ones.

 

[UncleBuck]

You accuse me of baseless accusations and your reply with more Marx rhetoric lol. I highlighted expecting you to be too incompetent to see it.

that's not marxist rhetoric, it's historical fact.

when our tax code became less progressive starting in the 80's, the middle class started to shrink and the gap between wealthy and greese trap bigots grew.

cry all ya want, it won't change history.

 

[UncleBuck]

*I've already repeated the real explanation many times: we the people, the poor, middle class, and wealthy alike, concentrated wealth by shifting our purchasing power to large national business interests, away from independent, regional, and local ones.

citation needed.

didn't they teach you that at devry?

 

[tokeprep]

citation needed.

I looked at the total market capitalization of stocks in the United States in 1988 (earliest year the World Bank had) and 2012. In 1988, the market cap was $2.8 trillion, or $5.4 trillion adjusting for inflation, versus a GDP of $9.34 trillion (in 2013 dollars). In 2012, the market cap was $18.7 trillion, versus a GDP of approximately $15.5 trillion (in 2013 dollars). Total market cap was 60% of GDP in 1988; today it's 120% of GDP.

Now look at these graphs: View attachment 2849098

You'll notice that from 1988 to 2013, the top 1% saw its income nearly double along with that doubling of market cap. Now see this graph:

This one shows the price to earnings ratio of the S&P 500 from 1988 to 2012 (the S&P 500 captures approximately 80% of the total market cap). The ratio is almost identical, meaning that stocks are approximately valued at the same premium to earnings today as they were in 1988. This means the change in market cap isn't related to stocks being undervalued or overvalued in either of the periods I'm comparing. Thus publicly traded corporate valuation as a percentage of GDP has approximately doubled while the valuation metric has remained the same.

Conclusion: the wealthy are wealthier primarily because they own the financial assets (the top 10% owns 80% of financial assets). Corporations, as noted above, earn twice as much from the economy as they did in 1988 and are thus valued at twice the level they were 25 years ago. Where do corporate earnings come from? Us. Every time a person shops at Wal-Mart, Home Depot, or Starbucks, they leave just a fraction of the money in the community (local suppliers plus the pay to local employees), with the rest going elsewhere (to suppliers elsewhere and to the owners). The reverberations should be easy to spot. By importing cheap Chinese junk, Wal-Mart not only put local stores out of business, they also put the suppliers of the local stores out of business. Consumers got lower prices, but higher wage jobs were replaced with lower wage ones, and a lot of money shifted overseas. Instead of owning a store, manufacturing business, coffee shop, or diner, people were left working at Wal-Mart, Starbucks, Red Lobster, etc.

It's wrong to blame corporate greed for this process. All the corporations did was give consumers what they wanted, primarily lower prices. How do you lower the price? You start by eliminating the "excess wages" being earned by owners and employees, then you switch to cheaper (typically foreign) suppliers, again eliminating the "excess value" that was being paid. You get lower prices at the cost of another person's good living and/or job.

How did humans react to this? Let's just say Wal-Mart took in $470 billion of our money last year. People vote with their dollars, and they chose to be selfish, paying less for stuff at the expense of whoever sold it before Wal-Mart or any other national enterprise did.

didn't they teach you that at devry?

I have degrees from two top national universities. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

[tokeprep]

I can't edit that post for some reason, so let me append this to the first section:

There was $13 trillion in personal income in 2012. The bottom 99% controlled almost $10 trillion of it. So whose fault is wealth inequality? Our fault. We're constantly feeding the beast and we have no one to blame but ourselves. People vote with their dollars.

As an example, let me use the a grocery store cooperative where I live. They pay workers there more than minimum wage and even give them some benefits; they also make every effort to obtain stuff from local suppliers and have a large selection of local food. Great, right? They have a lot of stores but their share of sales in this town is a tiny fraction of overall grocery sales. Why? Because everything there costs substantially more than it does at any other grocery store. If I shopped there, I would literally have to spend twice as much on groceries. Consequently, almost no one shops there.

Repeat this for every industry in every place and you've explained the increases in wealth and income inequality. The consumer's search for the lowest price has driven money away from the people at the bottom/in the middle and into the hands of those at the top. But it's a willing choice, one that all people are constantly making. If it means a lower price, fuck the people working for minimum wage, right?

So don't blame the tax system. Point your finger at the people at the bottom and in the middle and put the blame where it belongs.

 

[burgertime2010]

I am not an expert on taxes by any means. I certainly have and do benefit because of the disability I receive and that being said I am grateful. I am realizing that the allocation of taxes within government is a way to mitigate conflicts between the right and left. It seems logical to tax religious organizations....this exemption is unfair and is a church and state issue. Seems unconstitutional to give special treatment here to me and a way to increase revenue fairly. Another example of a way to increase revenue would be to eliminate corporate welfare....I see no reason why Americans should carry that burden. With the benefit of a majority of Americans in mind, where can we come together?

 

[Winter Woman]

The part that cracks me up most about buck is he calls himself a Capitalist.

He most certainly is not a Capitalist. He lives off his father-in-law and wife, probably doesn't pay taxes on all of his income, and is going to apply for obamacare and probably try claiming a subsidy that he probably doesn't qualify for (because he probably doesn't report all of his income), thus feeding off of those that are honest, and then he claims he is going to buy a farm using those ill gotten gains.

That is how Communists do it.

 

[Rob Roy]

Yeah? Without Volunteers, there is Conscription. Without taxes, there is Confiscation. Without Govt paid free education of the MOB, there is Sharia and other religious education, only. That is why we have public education.

Tax causes war? How stupid is that? Tax is just a more civilized way to pay for it.

Why don't you read history instead of just that re-gurg nonsense?

No taxes don't always CAUSE wars. However WITHOUT taxation, wars would not be funded. What does your history book say about excessive taxation and the American Revolution?

 

[Doer]

No taxes don't always CAUSE wars. However WITHOUT taxation, wars would not be funded. What does your history book say about excessive taxation and the American Revolution?

Do you need to look up the word CONFISCATION? This is how all war was conducted before Taxes. And your idea that tax funds war is only correct in that it levels the confiscation under Law. But, Confiscation is the main practice of War.

You, if may say, in a friendly fashion, seem a bit light on the details of the history of Law and Order. Go back to Hammurabi and before that.

You act like these are new, and not ancient ideas. Law and Order is the Social Contact. It is why we have guns to maintain civil order on our properties. Before Steel guns, is was Iron defense. And before that Bronze, but before that was Stone, and firstly a poke in the eye with a blunt stick. Stand off range and protecting the farm and folks began long before guns or taxes.

Now if I needed a squad of eye pokers, I'd conscript if absolutely necessary, but my culture is Warrior. I would confiscate valuables from the tribe, most of the grains and livestock, etc and go kick some ass. If we didn't kick ass, the tribe would not need those valuables. And being Warriors, no one complains. No on has silly theories a la Rothbard, or Cassuis Clay. Silly noters are not suffered to live as cowards among us.

That was old days, <sigh> Was good, but this is "better." We have Warriors again after the snot kicking, booger flinging about Viet Nam.

But, we still have the Tamerhills to jack the emotions of the unwary.

 

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

No taxes don't always CAUSE wars. However WITHOUT taxation, wars would not be funded. What does your history book say about excessive taxation and the American Revolution?

War bonds.

Not a tax. Voluntary purchasing.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_bond

My remembrance is No taxation without representation. Not, our taxes are too damned high, let's kill redcoats.