What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Know a Book Lover? Give Them the Sony Reader Touch view!
bestbuy.com - It's sleek and light, stores hundreds of books and has a long lasting battery.
572 Comments
- inactive, on 01/30/2009, -53/+279Countdown to the clueless cons jumping in here to demand that we continue funneling our money to the upper class.
5..4..3..2..1 - apastafarian, on 01/30/2009, -31/+190Boy, are they going to miss Bush!
- HumanNouveau, on 01/30/2009, -11/+132Where do these people live? Do they tip well? Do they need their cars washed? I'm seriously needing some of that trickle-down.
- inactive, on 01/30/2009, -33/+135I'd like to see them taxed down to my level, or the level of people I know working two and three jobs just to keep a roof over their heads. What about the homeowners who have been about two paychecks away from homelessness for years.
I swear to holy heaven, who are these Right Wing people who support them this kind of crap? Are they getting "trickled down" upon and we just don't know about it? Are the people who listen to Rush and Ann and Michelle and Bay and whoever else getting secret checks in the mail? - mediablitz, on 01/31/2009, -18/+117So where are the jobs these tax cuts supposedly create?
Time and again, real data proves tax cuts for hte wealthy do NOT stimulate the economy, yet the Republicans run on that false premise year after year, and their constituents BUY into it, all the while being able to BUY less and less. - Alheithinn, on 01/30/2009, -33/+128Why do these poor ignorant, anti-intellectual people support the party of the rich white man...oh wait, I just answered my own question. Never mind.
- InfamousAtheist, on 01/31/2009, -10/+96"Do they tip well?"
***** no they don't. - booksnmore4you, on 01/31/2009, -11/+85But is we continue to feed oats to the horses, they'll eventually ***** out enough for the sparrows to nibble.
- JenniferInMO, on 01/31/2009, -25/+99Thanks, Joe the Plumber and Joe Six-Pack for vehemently standing up for the uber rich and their greed. They are laughing all the way to the banks which just failed with the money from the 401(k)s of "regular people."
We've been "spreading the wealth" for years. - novenator, on 01/31/2009, -21/+86For anyone who ever doubted that bush and the republicans were the tools of the rich and corporate masters, here is your proof. Follow the money.
- Berkana, on 01/31/2009, -24/+88It boggles my mind that the "Christian" Right kept lining up uncritically behind such politicians. It is written:
James 5:1-6
Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. [Substitute stocks and mutual funds for gold and silver in modern times.] Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.You have condemned and murdered innocent men, who were not opposing you.
Favoritism towards the rich is condemned without ambiguity. The biggest con pulled off by the GOP in recent times (among the many cons pulled off by the GOP) has been to get fools like "Joe the Plumber" to advocate on behalf of the tax cuts going to the rich. And as always, somehow folks like J the P think that it's okay to keep fighting war on borrowed money while cutting taxes to the rich. They never seem to realize that it's a rich man's war, but a poor man's fight. - ZZeke, on 01/30/2009, -10/+71No, most of them are just ignoramuses who would support anything if you tell them it's "conservative".
- Nerys, on 01/31/2009, -6/+60I so wish I was only taxed 17.2% thats ALMOST a fair tax.(almost 10% is my max for "fair")
I currently put out close to 30% in taxes and I can not even afford health care! - Yez70, on 01/31/2009, -13/+64@adcheung
What the heck are you talking about? They may pay for some of the public services, but not most. They use far more of these services than the average American too.
Who got the 700B Bank bailout bill? The Rich.
Who uses the SEC? The Rich.
Who depends on the strength of our military to keep commodity prices stable and profitable? The Rich.
Who controls the FCC for their own bvenefit? The Rich.
Who do the lobbyist work for, so all those fancy pork projects that get passed benefit their income? The Rich.
Yes, some may argue the military is for all of us, but why? Are we going to be invaded? How? There are more guns in the hands of our citizens than the military - can you picture an invader getting anywhere with the USA? Nope.
The SEC and FCC do NOTHING for the ordinary American, except ignore what we think.
How many lobbyists work for you?
Did that bank bailout help anyone in need of a foreclosure? Nope.
If anything, the taxes on the rich should be tripled. Incomes should be capped at 100 times the lowest paid employee of a company too. Anyone earning more than 100 million a year should fall into a 75% tax bracket, just like everyone did in the 1930s. - goes211, on 01/31/2009, -6/+57This is only looking at the richest of the rich. First it points out that the income difference is largely due to capital gains.
Capital gains are often taxes that can be timed. If I bought $100,000 worth Microsoft stock in 1983 and never sold it, I would be siting on a very large gain and would not have to pay any taxes until I sell the stock. If the government lowers the capital gains tax, a rich person is more likely to sell and realize the gain and therefore increase his taxable income.
It also mentions that this income is not so high if indexed to inflation. That is where the government really gets you on capital gains. If I buy something and then 10 years later sell it for twice the price, did I really double my money? No because the money was worth a lot more 10 years ago than it is today because inflation eats away at that profit. However the government taxes me as it I realized the whole gain because capital gains taxes are not indexed to inflation.
Add the fact that most of the inflation is caused by government deficit spending and you can see that it is not such a great deal. The government gets to create inflation and then tax its citizens on inflated gains. Also because it is a net borrower it get to payback its debts in inflated money.
I am not saying that you should feel sorry for the uber-rich crowed but realize this deal is not as good as it sounds. Jealousy does nobody any good.
It would be far more productive to point out how the rich use their power and influence to game politicians and the system. Now that is a topic worth public anger! - Anomaly100, on 01/31/2009, -38/+87One of the reasons I like President Obama is that it feels as if he's on our side. He's trying to look out for us....his country, our country. Bush, even in his 9/11 glory days of folks shouting USA! USA!, still seemed detached from us, not part of us but part of the wealthiest in this country. Candidate Obama seemed so patient, never losing his temper. President Obama is getting pissed off. Pissed off with Wall Street, Limbaugh, Republicans that won't work with him to save our behinds.
Buh-bye Bush, it's a new day! - inactive, on 01/31/2009, -23/+611% of this country owns half its wealth while the 99%-ers have to bail out huge corporate worthless stock to these *****.
A Democracy? You're kidding, right? We live in a Plutocracy.
On top of all this;
America manufactures and exports more weapons than ANY OTHER COUNTRY
America builds more prisons than schools
America builds more prisons than ANY OTHER COUNTRY per capita.
America imprisons more of their citizens than ANY OTHER COUNTRY per capita.
A plutocracy doesn't have anything to do with the benefit of the citizens and taxpayers. That's certainly what the populations are told, but that isn't what it is.
James Madison wasn't deluded in what he was doing.
So, foxified wackjobs, keep spouting your ignorant BS strewn with the psychological buzzwords like, "freedom," "democracy," and other abstractions that are molded to serve autocratic/plutocratic ends.
Wilkommen to Amerika, Fools! - Ajajadude, on 01/31/2009, -2/+40Nobody can afford healthcare. I can only afford the bare minimum coverage...which wouldn't help me if I actually became seriously ill or injured.
- inactive, on 01/31/2009, -19/+51It's screwed up how blind their "base is"... after 8 straight years of tax and spend they're STILL waiting for the cash to come "trickling down" to them...many of them now standing on the unemployment line or waiting for their unemployment check (you know the "welfare" the government give out that they bitch and complain about...until they NEED it)... the only thing that "trickled down" on them over the past 8 years was Bush/Cheney and their rich friends pissing on their heads.
- inactive, on 01/31/2009, -7/+38@adcheung
Even assuming what you're saying is true, the fact is that the rich are where they are today because of the public. If it wasn't for the people in the lower and middle classes doing the grunt work, the rich wouldn't even have a system for them to capitalize upon. If the rich can stash billions in their bank accounts, they should have no qualms about paying a little more to alleviate the burdens placed on those who keep the gears of their money machines turning. - mirot, on 01/31/2009, -10/+40so if their tax rates go down by a third, and their income doubles.... the government collects more taxes.
Most of the world's billionaires didn't get there by screwing the system. They offered consumers a worthy product/service, they pay their taxes, provide millions of jobs, and often times, donate to charity. All stakeholders benefit. - Runningflame570, on 02/01/2009, -5/+34No, they didn't. They created the initial wealth but after the jumping off point the wealth creates itself. Question: How hard did the Waltons work for their collective $40-50 billion in family wealth?
Answer: No where near a million times harder than Walmart employees which make $40,000 off them if they're lucky. - darladoon, on 01/31/2009, -2/+30yeah, right! as i recall---the largest wall street brokers were the first to cry for a bailout, pal.
- InfamousAtheist, on 01/31/2009, -3/+31It doesn't boggle my mind. The "Christian" Right is the biggest bunch of hypocrites in history.
Behavior like this just fits their pattern. Preachers have been talking out both sides of their mouths as long as there has been a church. They might as well be politicians. - heybot, on 01/31/2009, -3/+31Here's what it looks like with some additional relevant information, specifically the men's income and total cost of beer relative to their income:
The first 4 men make $8 a day and their beer costs them $0.80 a day. They still have $7.20 in their wallet afterward (90% of their income).
The fifth man makes $32.55 a day and his beer costs $4.48 a day. He still has $28.07 in his wallet (86.2% of his income).
The sixth makes $78.85 a day and his beer costs $16.06 a day. He still has $62.79 in his wallet (79.6% of his income).
The seventh makes $164.55 a day and his beer costs $40.05. He still has $124.50 in his wallet (75.7% of his income).
The eighth makes $357.70 per day and his beer costs $103.79. He still has $253.91 in his wallet (71% of his income).
The ninth makes $800 per day and his beer costs $258.60. He still has $541.40 in his wallet (67.7% of his income).
The tenth man makes $5,000.00 per day and his beer costs him $1,728.60. He still has $3,271.40 in his wallet (65.4% of his income).
Overall, the bartender makes $2154.78 each day.
So, one way to look at it is "The first four men only paid 80 cents for their beer while the tenth man paid over $1700 for his beer. That's completely unfair!"
Another way to look at it is "At the end of the day, the first four men only have $7.20 left in their wallet but the tenth man has nearly $3300 left in his wallet. Even though the tenth man is paying a lot more for his beer, his wallet is still awfully fat when he leaves the bar."
I think the most interesting thing though is the plight of the guys in the middle, specifically the sixth man. Everyone is paying roughly 4% more of his total income than the previous guy except for the sixth man, who is paying nearly 7% more than the fifth man.
So let's adjust the numbers again and make everyone pay 4% more than the guy in front of them, except for the 9th and 10th men who will pick up the burden of paying 7% and 9% more than the 8th man, respectively (in other words, let's simulate a rough version of Obama's tax plan):
The first 4 men make $8 per day and their beer still costs them $0.80 per day. They still have $7.20 in their wallet afterward (90% of their income).
The fifth man makes $32.55/day and his beer costs $4.56/day. He still has $27.99 in his wallet (86% of his income).
The sixth man makes $78.85/day and his beer costs $14.19/day. He still has $64.66 in his wallet (82% of his income).
The seventh man makes $164.55/day and his beer costs $36.20/day. He still has $128.35 in his wallet (78% of his income).
The eighth man makes $357.70/day and his beer costs $93/day. He still has $264.70 in his wallet (74% of his income).
The ninth man makes $800/day and his beer costs $264/day. He still has $536 in his wallet (67% of his income)
The tenth man makes $5,000/day and his beer costs $1750/day. He still has $3,250 in his wallet (65% of his income).
Overall the bartender makes $2165.15 each day.
So what did we learn from this exercise? The first 5 men (i.e the lower classes) pay pretty close to exactly what they were paying before. The sixth, seventh, and eighth men (i.e. the middle and upper-middle classes) all pay between 9.6% and 11.6% LESS than they did before. Only the 9th (i.e. rich) and 10th (i.e. ultra-rich) are paying more than they were before and they are only paying 2.1% and 1.2% more, respectively. Also notice that the bartender (i.e. the Federal Government) is making half of a percent more than he did before!
By the way, translated into real dollars, the ninth man makes $800,000 a year, the tenth man makes $5,000,000 a year. - Alheithinn, on 01/31/2009, -4/+30In many cases, these people have so many tax loopholes, they pay no taxes at all. All we're asking is that they not receive special tax breaks that allow them to pay less than their fair share. This has nothing to do with class warfare, Ymet. These people control legislation and they ensure that they are well looked out for in the halls of Congress, and at the expense of the American people. It's time this privilege is called out and stopped.
- rjey, on 01/31/2009, -12/+38"although the richest 400 Americans paid more tax on an inflation-adjusted basis than any year since 2000. "
Ok first of all this tax was only initiated in 1992. Keeping that in mind don't ignore this quoted fact. If you libs want more tax dollars, this did indeed work.
Tax cuts can and do improve tax revenue. Even JFK realized this. - CarpeFishem, on 01/31/2009, -3/+27Meanwhile, tax revenue increased beyond what everyone expected it. Supply-side economics ftw.
Remember John Kerry only paying 12.78% income tax in 2004? That kind of crap happens because of our labyrinthine, giant tax code. The rich have the means to artificially decrease their taxes because they have fleets of lawyers who can find the loopholes for them. If we institute a flat tax, there'll be no way the rich can get away with paying a lower percent than anyone. However, if we keep adding bureaucratic crap to our current tax code (and you know the Congressmen who write this are just doing it so they can exploit it for their own gain), it'll just get easier and easier for the rich while we continue to get crushed.
So, stop all the class envy and whining; the problem isn't that these people are rich but that they can exploit the damn tax code. - mediablitz, on 01/31/2009, -7/+31http://www.cbpp.org/9-27-06tax.htm
Here is an easy reading, Cliff notes version
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/106410
And tax cuts without spending cuts:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=3179936&pa ...
Start there. The Internet is your friend. Plus, we have been under Bush tax cuts for the rich for how many years? And how is the jobs market, and our deficit? Do you really need links for that? - inactive, on 01/31/2009, -3/+26dcolem:
I'd normally agree with your sentiment, but these people are paying substantially less in taxes, as a percentage of income, than I am. If they were even paying the same amount as me, I could live with that. But the tax system is so broken that, with enough money and a good accountant, you can legally circumvent the system. Warren Buffett himself has said that, of the richest people in American, virtually all of them pay a lower tax percentage than their secretaries. Add to that the fact that the rest of the country is currently funding an enormous stimulus package to keep their main sources of income afloat, and you really can't blame anyone for being bitter and angry. - Ajajadude, on 01/31/2009, -3/+24Most of these people we're talking about don't own their companies. Therefore, none of their personal income goes to paying wages. Wages are paid with company money, not CEO or Board money. Did you really think Gates would cut checks from his personal account to everyone working for Microsoft?
- rizzo2008, on 01/31/2009, -3/+24yes tax revenues actually INCREASED when Bush cut taxes almost 5 years back now. Im not a fan of Bush but facts are facts
- awfl, on 01/31/2009, -2/+22You're not doin' it right.... Just kidding... seriously, these people find ways of writing it all off or offshoring their company and profits. Regular people will not be able to.
- BassMastr, on 01/31/2009, -18/+38I'm not at all saying something isn't wrong but the one thing I do notice is this board is full of blaming other people for their problems. I have noticed one thing in life and those with the most problems are the same ones who don't take responsiblity for their own mistakes. There are plenty of opportunities out there. I look at the internet and news paper and find hundreds every day. I had no problem finding a job when I needed to find one and I even had choices. If you can't make ends meet then it's time to advance yourself and find a new profession. While these few shouldn't control the amount of wealth that they do...it's not their fault you are in the situation you are in. Seriously did you really think the US could keep living off debt? Did you really think we could keep buying houses we couldn't afford? If you didn't see a economic storm on the horizon than you weren't paying attention.
- RonPauls, on 01/31/2009, -29/+48A lot of people here are blinded by jealousy.
These rich people are the ones who create the jobs, provide investment capital, and provide a lion's share of the income taxes paid.
In fact, I have read that the top 1% of wage-earnings pay over 33% of the federal income tax.
The amount of money you earn does not make you a good person or a bad person.
Please judge people as individuals, not as collectives. - novenator, on 01/31/2009, -0/+19I would add that part of the problem is when the top wage earner (usually the CEO) makes over 500x the salary of the lowest paid person in the company, something is seriously ***** up. If the business is small (such as family owned, 'ma and pa' stores, etc.), I see your point, but don't think these places were helped that much under bush, but wal-mart certainly was.
- JoeVet, on 01/31/2009, -3/+22Its the idiots like ^^^ who think that "someday" they will make it to the big league and then they won't have to pay taxes either. Until that day happens they will happily pay more than their fair share just so they can keep on daydreaming about their big day.
- ZZeke, on 01/31/2009, -9/+28Have you ever heard of the Constitution?
The Constitution says that the only legal taxation on wages would be a flat tax across the board, not some 10 pound book written in hieroglyphics which ultimately takes more from the hardest working people who struggle to make ends meet than it does from the trust fund babies - the vast majority of whom don't even know what "work" is, and never will. The Income tax "system" is unconstitutional.
Besides, we're talking about the richest 400 Americans here, I guarantee you that most if not all of them we're born or married into most of their money. These are people who will never want for anything, they could literally wipe their asses with hundreds every day and still have literally millions left to spend every month without ever going broke, and so can their great-grandchildren. Why in the world would you think they should be immune to the very same taxation as the people who scrub their toilets?
This is supposed to be the land of equality. Having a tax system which takes the least from the people who have the most is in direct conflict with that ideal...and this is just the tip of the iceberg in the land of financial inequality.
Federal income taxes do NOT pay for roads, police protection, fire protection, EMS, trash collection, or ANY OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC SERVICES. These are paid through PROPERTY TAX and state or county funds, not Federal taxation. Do you know what income tax DOES pay for? a PERCENTAGE of the INTEREST OWED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to the FEDERAL RESERVE - which they collect simply because they PRINTED THE MONEY. You are completely uneducated about the federal income tax if you think it pays for your local services.
Do your homework, be a better American. There's nothing wrong with loving your country, but there is a serious problem when you think that patriotism means supporting the institutions which suck the average American dry.
I'll get you started: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-165688030 ...
This is a documentary which will explain to you how the income tax was created, and what the income tax is really all about. It was directed by a man who loved his country. This is not "liberal propaganda", it's factual and non-partisan. I can only hope you wish to educate yourself instead of continuing to spread false information to your children and those around you. Until we realize the truth, we can never be free. - amish4play, on 01/31/2009, -8/+26So basically it is better for the elite to control how the money gets spent, vs the government and/or the people? Heck they should tax the poor 90%, and give it straight to the top 400! Imagine how much wealth goods and services they would create for us... GO TOP 400 WOOOOOO!
- inactive, on 01/31/2009, -9/+27I don't see a single person on this thread even mentioning "their problems" (wtf is that, anyway?). We are talking about the problems of the country as a whole -- you know, OUR problems.
Your only argument is that you haven't yet been affected by the economy -- a sort of modern "they came for the communists" defense. But the problem is that it's not about you. It's about all of us and what we choose to do as Americans.
How will any of your suggestions build a road? Or repair a bridge? Or pay off a single dollar of our national debt? How will it get healthcare for a single disabled veteran? Or educate a child born into poverty?
The truth is that they won't because, again, *this isn't about you*. There are some problems that can only be solved collectively, and fixing our economy is one of those. Simple economics (and basic history) shows that taking wealth from many people and giving it to a few is a recipe for disaster.
And that's not a problem that one person can solve by reading the want ads. - bombula, on 01/31/2009, -11/+2810% huh? And you wonder why the roads suck, the power and phone and water and healthcare monopolies ***** you, Wall Street is busy collapsing putting the economy in the toilet and millions out of jobs, we've got a national debt so large that you and me and every other man, woman and child in this country owes almost $40,000, and we're trailing Morocco and Turkey in literacy and education because teachers earn just over minimum wage in schools that are literally falling apart. And that's with a functional tax rate that averages out to something like 20%.
As opposed to Europe, where other developed countries have tax rates closer to 50% but they beat us on every single criteria that matters - crime rates, literacy, infant mortality, healthcare, you name it.
And you want 10%. Great idea there, Einstein. - inactive, on 02/01/2009, -3/+20Tax cuts for the wealthy DO preserve jobs, the jobs of politicians who receive campaign contributions from the wealthy.
- sloppychris, on 01/31/2009, -10/+27How does letting people keep what they earned count as "funneling money" to them?
- scamper22, on 01/31/2009, -17/+34If you trust the government to spend 60% of some rich person's money... you should trust the government with 60% of your money.
Flat tax... even if it is a high flat tax.
At least the Nordic countries are honest about their socialism. American leftist just want free ***** with no responsibility.
They tend to have double digit sales taxes (20%+) and even tax food. - inactive, on 01/31/2009, -2/+19So...tell me...that's what Bush did... do you have more customers? Because MOST companies are now laying off people... you know..with those taxes that were dropped...while we increased spending... There is NO denying that these tax breaks from Bush and Co. while we increased spending have led to near record unemployment. Worse even than what his daddy and reagan did. All those tax breaks did was let Exxon and companies that deal in the "billions" of dollars, make record profits.
Right now...TODAY...we STILL have the Bush economic plan...his tax breaks... so let me know...have you hired any new employees? Why are you waiting for Obama? You STILL have those tax breaks now... so go start hiring! What are you "waiting" for? - ricperry1, on 01/31/2009, -4/+20We can only hope.
- inactive, on 01/31/2009, -5/+21and the retarded repugs with regan as a spiritual advisor led us into this mess. ***** trickle down, screw corporate ceo's, ***** big oil. thanks god america woke up and voted out the most retarded economic policies of the last eight years...
- stanleyford, on 02/01/2009, -4/+19Because the underlying assumption is that all wealth--regardless of who produced it--belongs to the community and not to the individual. It doesn't matter how intelligent, creative, ambitious, or innovative I am; if I keep more than my "share," then I am robbing those who are entitled to the proceeds of my labor.
- inactive, on 01/31/2009, -8/+23Troy: I was wondering how long it would take for some clueless idiot to bring the Laffer Curve into the debate. Since you apparently don't even know what it's called, I'm sure you also have no idea why it doesn't work (and it's been *proven* that it doesn't work in practice). Go read up on it before you make snide remarks that betray your ignorance of even simple, 101-level economics.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 587 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is