• A majority of americans agree that taxes need to be raised on the corporations and the rich
    190 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sir Colton;31146781]I disagree, I think we should all be taxed the same. Just people some people make more money doesn't mean they should be punished.[/QUOTE] Yea and poor people shouldn't be punished for being poor (look up poverty tax). Basically a rich person can still live there life if we took 30% of there money away but a poor person could not. As someone who lives on section 8 I will tell you that there would be no way to pay rent and eat food that isn't rice if we got taxed the same percent as the rich.
I saw earlier how Minnesota decide to cut funding to schools rather than raise taxes. Glad I don't live in that dump. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sir Colton;31146781]I disagree, I think we should all be taxed the same. Just people some people make more money doesn't mean they should be punished.[/QUOTE] They aren't punished. They still have more money than most other people.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31144814]Yeah and a few months ago the entire country was going to stop functioning because a budget hadn't been worked out, that's typical sensationalist this forum is named after. OH SHIT FIVE DAYS OF TALKS WELL BEFORE THE DEADLINE THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE AS BELGIUM DOESN'T HAVE A GOVERNMENT FOR A YEAR OH WELL NOT A BIG DEAL.[/QUOTE] Why are you talking about what happened a few months ago? I am talking about these current events that are being openly critized by the Germans as well. Obama himself walked out of the discussions. I cited a respectable source and now you are calling it sensationalist? The Belgiums held an election that resulted in a deadlocked that didn't produce a govermenent. There are big protests in Belgium and they are doing what they can to get a govermenent. Also, I never said that it wasn't a big deal.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;31146856]Taxes are not "punishment". And if people get rich because their business succeeds, they owe a lot of that success to government services. Taxes pay for the roads your goods and customers travel on. Government regulation protects your business from the unfair practices of others (ideally). Entitlement programs allow more customers to afford your products. The FDIC insures the money in your company bank accounts. Without government, you get Somalia. Every rich person in this country owes a great deal to the overall system that allows them to succeed. On top of that, the richer you are, the more you can afford to contribute in taxes without it affecting your standard of living. Is the CEO of DirecTV going to have a worse life with $30 million a year instead of $32 million? I think not.[/QUOTE] Except the US, as far as I'm aware, is not a kind of nanny-state, and I think it's rather a theft of credit, amongst other things, to grossly tax the "rich" by claiming that the government helped them get where they were. I'd like to point out that UNSUCCESSFUL businesses, which make poor people, also get these "government aids" - roads, FDIC, etc. However, at some stage, despite this relative equality in government involvement, one business may be grossly richer than another. Why? I'm not a businessman, but it's safe to assume this MUST be attributable to the people running the business - not the government. If the government makes successful business, why aren't all businesses successful? I've said it before, and I'll say it again - self-righteously "taxing the rich" in some sort of blanket manner is not the perfect solution, and will only serve to alienate many people.
[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;31151747]Except the US, as far as I'm aware, is not a kind of nanny-state, and I think it's rather a theft of credit, amongst other things, to grossly tax the "rich" by claiming that the government helped them get where they were. I'd like to point out that UNSUCCESSFUL businesses, which make poor people, also get these "government aids" - roads, FDIC, etc. However, at some stage, despite this relative equality in government involvement, one business may be grossly richer than another. Why? I'm not a businessman, but it's safe to assume this MUST be attributable to the people running the business - not the government. If the government makes successful business, why aren't all businesses successful? I've said it before, and I'll say it again - self-righteously "taxing the rich" in some sort of blanket manner is not the perfect solution, and will only serve to alienate many people.[/QUOTE] Tax the rich because taxes got the rich richer. The things you said that would "Lead to success" actually contributed to it greatly. A successful business wouldn't be successful without any of those things, so there's your entire viewpoint shattered.
[QUOTE=GeneralFredrik;31151186]Why are you talking about what happened a few months ago? I am talking about these current events that are being openly critized by the Germans as well. Obama himself walked out of the discussions. I cited a respectable source and now you are calling it sensationalist? The Belgiums held an election that resulted in a deadlocked that didn't produce a govermenent. There are big protests in Belgium and they are doing what they can to get a govermenent. Also, I never said that it wasn't a big deal.[/QUOTE]Because the same exact things were said when the budget deal was coming along slowly months ago apparently no one remembers that, how we'd have to stop paying welfare and the troops and the mailmen and the country is going to collapse and in the end nothing happened and they reached a deal just like they will now because they always have. In other words the media that made a huge deal about it was alarmist, just like it is now. ITT dumb things are being said like this is an entire failure of American democracy or some bs which is completely ridiculous even though talks are still going on, and while a country that actually did have a hitch in its democratic process hasn't had a government in over a year and yet even they still have the country functioning.
[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;31151747]Except the US, as far as I'm aware, is not a kind of nanny-state, and I think it's rather a theft of credit, amongst other things, to grossly tax the "rich" by claiming that the government helped them get where they were. I'd like to point out that UNSUCCESSFUL businesses, which make poor people, also get these "government aids" - roads, FDIC, etc. However, at some stage, despite this relative equality in government involvement, one business may be grossly richer than another. Why? I'm not a businessman, but it's safe to assume this MUST be attributable to the people running the business - not the government. If the government makes successful business, why aren't all businesses successful? I've said it before, and I'll say it again - self-righteously "taxing the rich" in some sort of blanket manner is not the perfect solution, and will only serve to alienate many people.[/QUOTE] Name 1 problem that cant be solved by taxing the rich. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] You have five days.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31152351]Because the same exact things were said when the budget deal was coming along slowly months ago apparently no one remembers that, how we'd have to stop paying welfare and the troops and the mailmen and the country is going to collapse and in the end nothing happened and they reached a deal just like they will now because they always have. In other words the media that made a huge deal about it was alarmist, just like it is now. ITT dumb things are being said like this is an entire failure of American democracy or some bs which is completely ridiculous even though talks are still going on, and while a country that actually did have a hitch in its democratic process hasn't had a government in over a year and yet even they still have the country functioning.[/QUOTE] The Belgium government does not work the same as yours does, quit being such a bitch and thinking every other country is the same as the US. We're not saying that this is a failure of American democracy, we're saying there is no American democracy. Your whole country is run by big corporations and you don't even notice.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;31152583]The Belgium government does not work the same as yours does, quit being such a bitch and thinking every other country is the same as the US. We're not saying that this is a failure of American democracy, we're saying there is no American democracy. Your whole country is run by big corporations and you don't even notice.[/QUOTE] The supreme court is the biggest example.
[QUOTE=Nikota;31152576]Name 1 problem that cant be solved by taxing the rich. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] You have five days.[/QUOTE] We can't necessarily tax just the rich. I know if I was making over a million a year, and they were taxing me to a higher percent as to regulars. Lets say 5%. That is 50,000 out of my money. If they were to raise that to 10% that is 100,000. So if they decide they want to raise taxes to something I think is observably high. I could just leave the country and work from China or something. Hurting the USA, but maximizing my income.
[QUOTE=Firegod522;31152635]We can't necessarily tax just the rich. I know if I was making over a million a year, and they were taxing me to a higher percent as to regulars. Lets say 5%. That is 50,000 out of my money. If they were to raise that to 10% that is 100,000. So if they decide they want to raise taxes to something I think is observably high. I could just leave the country and work from China or something. Hurting the USA, but maximizing my income.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it doesn't work that way. Large businesses tend to stay in the country they started in because it costs a fuckton of money to move all your shit to a different country, and because if you are surviving, making profits, that means you know how things work in the country you're working in. Moving to a different country would mean unfamiliar politicians, policy's, laws, it would be like starting all over again because you have no fucking clue how things work there.
[QUOTE=Firegod522;31152635]We can't necessarily tax just the rich. I know if I was making over a million a year, and they were taxing me to a higher percent as to regulars. Lets say 5%. That is 50,000 out of my money. If they were to raise that to 10% that is 100,000. So if they decide they want to raise taxes to something I think is observably high. I could just leave the country and work from China or something. Hurting the USA, but maximizing my income.[/QUOTE] Oh no. My money is going somewhere. I'll be able to buy less useless shit and expensive novelty items. :c
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31152351]Because the same exact things were said when the budget deal was coming along slowly months ago apparently no one remembers that, how we'd have to stop paying welfare and the troops and the mailmen and the country is going to collapse and in the end nothing happened and they reached a deal just like they will now because they always have.[/QUOTE] It was seriously close to not being reached at all. "Congressional leaders, with barely an hour to go before a federal government, announced late Friday night they had reached a deal to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year." I wouldn't really call it alarmist because that is very close and not at all as smooth as it could have been. [QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO]In other words the media that made a huge deal about it was alarmist, just like it is now.[/QUOTE] When the credit rating company Moody's and Standard & Poor are threatening to lower the United states score I think it's time for some serious action. When the time hits the second of August, the United States will not have anymore money. It's going to either default or come up with a new solution. Whatever happens, shit is gonna go down like a fucking A bomb in the economy and seeing how bad things are right now I seriously think that the Democrats and Republicans should take their stupid political differences aside and stop cockblocking the whole issue. This is very serious and I don't think you should play it as lightly as you do right now.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31145297] into the ground huh? Things look pretty fine around here, quality of life seems to be pretty nice, gas and food are relatively cheap, employment could be worse.[/QUOTE] You must live in a posh as fuck place, because things aren't that fucking pristine everywhere else. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sir Colton;31146781]I disagree, I think we should all be taxed the same. Just people some people make more money doesn't mean they should be punished.[/QUOTE] That failure of an idea only helps the rich
Tax the rich, REASONABLY. If they earn US$10k per month, just take like 5% or something
[QUOTE=BCell;31153798]Tax the rich, REASONABLY. If they earn US$10k per month, just take like 5% or something[/QUOTE] 10K a month? Currently, if someone's income is $120K a year then they get taxed 28% 5% would be a massive step back
This is way too socialist in mind for american congressmen to pass. Its unconstitutional also. I remember something like this was proposed during the Great Depression but it failed to go through.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;31152583]The Belgium government does not work the same as yours does, quit being such a bitch and thinking every other country is the same as the US. We're not saying that this is a failure of American democracy, we're saying there is no American democracy. Your whole country is run by big corporations and you don't even notice.[/QUOTE]Lol I'm pretty sure you don't know how either of them functions, like at all. [QUOTE=GeneralFredrik;31153552]It was seriously close to not being reached at all. "Congressional leaders, with barely an hour to go before a federal government, announced late Friday night they had reached a deal to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year." I wouldn't really call it alarmist because that is very close and not at all as smooth as it could have been.[/QUOTE] It's a divided government they drag everything out it's not like it was at risk of not happening, a situation like that doesn't exist. The funniest part is it's not even what this article is about or what this thread is for, a majority of Americans agree to revenue increase and the posts have been how much of a failure something is that isn't a failure gj A+ [QUOTE]When the credit rating company Moody's and Standard & Poor are threatening to lower the United states score I think it's time for some serious action. When the time hits the second of August, the United States will not have anymore money. It's going to either default or come up with a new solution. Whatever happens, shit is gonna go down like a fucking A bomb in the economy and seeing how bad things are right now I seriously think that the Democrats and Republicans should take their stupid political differences aside and stop cockblocking the whole issue. This is very serious and I don't think you should play it as lightly as you do right now.[/QUOTE]They aren't going to default, everyone knows that they aren't and they have enough revenue to pay bond holders. Nothing is going to happen, at all. They'll reach a deal as usual even if they have to extend talks a couple days past deadline, they don't have a choice, because by that point it stops being a partisan issue and becomes necessary public policy. Again, if you seriously think this is a failure of American democracy you must not know it very well because it's actually never been better. [QUOTE=Nikota;31152576]Name 1 problem that cant be solved by taxing the rich. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] You have five days.[/QUOTE]The ability to effectively regulate soft money going to political parties. Boom just did it
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31153951]Lol I'm pretty sure you don't know how either of them functions.[/QUOTE] Okay.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;31154023]Okay.[/QUOTE]Yeah that's right okay THE BIG CORPORATIONS MAAAAAN they control everything! :tinfoil: Life is suddenly a Deus Ex fiction and how the government functions doesn't matter as long as you have a negative opinion of it HURR
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31154168]Yeah that's right okay THE BIG CORPORATIONS MAAAAAN they control everything! :tinfoil: Life is suddenly a Deus Ex fiction and how the government functions doesn't matter as long as you have a negative opinion of it HURR[/QUOTE] Anyone sensible can see that big corporations in the USA have way too much to say because of your two-party system and the huge amount of money it costs to get elected for anything. And don't start hurr durr Obama. He's one of the few that get the campaign money from the people instead of the corporations.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31153951]It's a divided government they drag everything out it's not like it was at risk of not happening, a situation like that doesn't exist. The funniest part is it's not even what this article is about or what this thread is for, a majority of Americans agree to revenue increase and the posts have been how much of a failure something is that isn't a failure gj A+[/QUOTE] I can't follow your post. What kind of situation doesn't exist? What's with the aggressive gj A+ post bullshit? [QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO]They aren't going to default, everyone knows that they aren't and they have enough revenue to pay bond holders. Nothing is going to happen, at all. They'll reach a deal as usual even if they have to extend talks a couple days past deadline, they don't have a choice, because by that point it stops being a partisan issue and becomes necessary public policy. Again, if you seriously think this is a failure of American democracy you must not know it very well because it's actually never been better.[/QUOTE] They WILL default if they do not come to an agreement, what is so hard to acknowledge about that? The United States can't magically create money out of nothing. Yes, they will probably reach a small time agreement but this is exactly the kind of attitude that Harry Flam and Stefan de Vylder, both researchers in international economy at Stockholm University, thinks it's the fundemental problem with the United States. That they live over their assets and don't recognise this problem. Please for the love of everything, Why are you so insistent on bringing up "The failure of American Democracy" when I haven't even mentioned something like that. I think you were meant to say that to someone else in this thread.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;31154254]Anyone sensible can see that big corporations in the USA have way too much to say because of your two-party system and the huge amount of money it costs to get elected for anything. And don't start hurr durr Obama. He's one of the few that get the campaign money from the people instead of the corporations.[/QUOTE]Right and Bush wasn't? Citizens v. FEC wasn't even in place when he won so that stuff wasn't even possible back then. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/8QUA0.png[/IMG] [QUOTE=GeneralFredrik;31154480]I can't follow your post. What kind of situation doesn't exist? What's with the aggressive gj A+ post bullshit? They WILL default if they do not come to an agreement, what is so hard to acknowledge about that? The United States can't magically create money out of nothing. Yes, they will probably reach a small time agreement but this is exactly the kind of attitude that Harry Flam and Stefan de Vylder, both researchers in international economy at Stockholm University, thinks it's the fundemental problem with the United States. That they live over their assets and don't recognise this problem. Please for the love of everything, Why are you so insistent on bringing up "The failure of American Democracy" when I haven't even mentioned something like that. I think you were meant to say that to someone else in this thread.[/QUOTE]It was never actually at risk of not passing a new budget they wait until the last moment to get the best deal for their party this always happens. There are so many alternatives to defaulting but this doesn't even matter because they haven't even reached the deadline yet and I have no idea what a small time agreement is because the numbers being thrown around here are between $2.5 and $1.5 trillion in debt reduction this is a big deal for both parties and like I said by the time the deadline arrives it stops being a partisan issue and becomes a function of public policy, just like the budget, just like the stimulus bills, just like most legislation passed. Your posts aren't the only ones in the thread there's so much bullshit in here it really doesn't matter who posted what, somehow the Republicans and Democrats trying to get the best deals out of each other has turned into a shitstorm about how the whole thing doesn't work and really beyond my first post I shouldn't even have had to explain it, this pessimism does no good, helps no one, and is somewhat out of touch with reality.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31154168]Yeah that's right okay THE BIG CORPORATIONS MAAAAAN they control everything! :tinfoil: Life is suddenly a Deus Ex fiction and how the government functions doesn't matter as long as you have a negative opinion of it HURR[/QUOTE] Are you seriously suggesting corporations have no negative influence whatsoever and to claim to makes you a conspiracy theorist?
[QUOTE=amute;31155977]Are you seriously suggesting corporations have no negative influence whatsoever and to claim to makes you a conspiracy theorist?[/QUOTE] Placing all blame on oil tycoons and corporate moguls is ridiculous. If they seriously have such power and influence in the government for the past few decades then the EPA probably wouldn't exist, or any other federal regulatory agency.
The problem is federal regulations are way to lax. Corporations are mostly to blame.
[QUOTE=amute;31156358]The problem is federal regulations are way to lax. Corporations are mostly to blame.[/QUOTE] If you really want to check the corporations then you need to check their lobbying. Not to mention that the U.S. government is divided right after a Republican president, so trying to improve regulation after a recession caused by retarded investors and banks would be even more difficult to get through. Obama's administration barely passed any in their first term because of the number of Republicans that were elected.
[QUOTE=amute;31155977]Are you seriously suggesting corporations have no negative influence whatsoever and to claim to makes you a conspiracy theorist?[/QUOTE]No it makes your opinion on government overly reductionist while ignoring the actual relationships between businesses and government. It doesn't sound like a conspiracy theorist, more like a clueless stoner but I don't know any emotes for that.
so hey aren't these guys supposed to represent us and our interests, not theirs?
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;31156425]If you really want to check the corporations then you need to check their lobbying.[/quote] This is still fucking part of the corporation influence. [quote]Not to mention that the U.S. government is divided right after a Republican president, so trying to improve regulation after a recession caused by retarded investors and banks would be even more difficult to get through. Obama's administration barely passed any in their first term because of the number of Republicans that were elected.[/QUOTE] Deregulation and shoddy established regulation helped create the recession, doing it further won't get anybody anywhere. [editline]16th July 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;31156440]No it makes your opinion on government overly reductionist while ignoring the actual relationships between businesses and government. It doesn't sound like a conspiracy theorist, more like a clueless stoner but I don't know any emotes for that.[/QUOTE] You don't need to be a clueless stoner to realise corporate influence and government are in our present time very good buddies and a negative influence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.