Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Starship, you realise that the 47% number is only about one type of tax. Most of the people in the 47% pay others type of tax and I'm pretty sure they all pay some kind of tax (sales tax is sill a tax). So please don't so saying that was a truthful statement, it's beneath you.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranMidget, I have been a patsy, I admit that. But this is a different case altogether.
You have people saying "the money isn't yours". Really? Who went to work for it?
You talk about myths. Let's talk about the myths that most wealth comes from investments. Numbers? Citations? Links? There are many people who make money on investments, true. There are shit ton of people who make money the old fashioned way, they earn it. Like a true American should.
I'm saying the government wastes a ton of money and leaves tons of it on the table via various dumbass moves. Don't bother denying this because you know it's true.
I mean you guys don't even see how your own logic defeats your argument. You claim I didn't own my money because the government provided the infrastructure. But the government suddenly owns the stories, products, services, innovations, etc. everyone came up with because....what? Because it was there?
Come on man. The government provided tools. I used them. I deserve the money I worked for and the government deserves to be paid for the services that are in place for everyone. Asking for me to foot the bill for a service that already has payments and is available for everyone to use is feeding this welfare state some people seem to believe in.
It's not a fully truthful statement, but the main point remains. Think of it as similar to the "truth" that all rich people made it from stocks.
edited 5th Apr '13 9:57:03 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorSo, by what standards is a CEO worth a $100 million salary? By what standards is a hedge fund manager worth a $100 million salary? A baseball player? An actor? Where is the added utility?
If salaries were reasonable at the top, then we wouldn't be having this discussion, because wealth shares would be far more equal. The fact is that, since 1970, median income has stagnated when adjusted for inflation, while top earners have skyrocketed. This is almost entirely due to reduced taxes.
edited 5th Apr '13 9:57:53 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It's not just the government that is incompetent and taking graft, Ship, it's everyone. This is a very crooked society we're living in. We may as well follow standard operating procedure and get some revenue rolling in, and cut out the cancer (military) in the bargain. True, under Truman there was an inflated tax but that was for installation of the security state. If we targeted the military spending and the upper tax bracket at the same time, literally half of our problems would be over.
I'm a skeptical squirrelThe democratic standard Fighteer. Alex Rodriguez (self-important, punk-ass twat that he is) is worth $20 million a year, because a bunch of taxpaying citizens decided they were okay with paying him that.
Is Kim Kardashian worth all that money for basically being in a porno? I don't think so, but in a free society, after folks pay their taxes, they have a right to contribute to such dubious endeavors as they wish.
It was an honor
By that line of logic, Society is contradictory. We value hard work and believe it will get us rich. In reality, hard work will get you joint and back problems and retirement at 65 from your janitorial job with nothing to show for it.
And yet somehow the guy making 100 million still earned his money more than the Janitor.
edited 5th Apr '13 10:01:29 AM by Midgetsnowman
Well then Midget, go ahead and set up a Soviet style government where some secret quorum decides what is utility and what isn't.
I won't be joining that endeavor, but have at it.
Seriously, seize just a third of the off-shore accounts and we'd pay the deficit off in less than five years.
edited 5th Apr '13 10:03:11 AM by TheStarshipMaxima
It was an honorThat's not democracy in action, Starship, that's capitalism in action. Which is fine, but we've found out in the past that sometimes unrestrained capitalism can in fact have unwanted consequences. That's why we have social safety nets, government-run schools and grants, and agencies to safeguard our air, water and food.
Are widespread large wealth disparities one of those unwanted consequences? Perhaps, but I tend to think so.
She of Short Stature & Impeccable Logic My Skating LiveblogUsually, the people who decide the price of things are those that have the most money in the equation.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Uh, yeah, nobody likes A-Rod. The weird thing about the team is that they always think paying more is better. A-Rod was only good for, maybe, four years tops as an athlete, yet they fell over themselves giving him a long term contract.
In fact, pro sports is a lot like Caligula's Rome now. Just a lot of excess and ego-stroking, and the fans don't like it. You should see the McMansions these guys live in, too.
edited 5th Apr '13 10:11:31 AM by johnnyfog
I'm a skeptical squirrel![]()
Teddy Roosevelt would have gone trust busting on their asses so fast they'd need to start handing out icepacks at the SEC for all the cases of whiplash.
edited 5th Apr '13 10:11:51 AM by RadicalTaoist
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.The problem with seizing money hidden in tax shelters is that doing so would require us to go to war with other countries. It's not as simple as just looking at the money and going 'mine' now.
As for closing tax loopholes, that wouldn't actually hurt the very rich much. Most of the tax loopholes are designed for the poor. They're designed to help single parents. They're designed to help people who aren't making a living wage. They're designed to help small business owners who are just starting out. Closing the tax loopholes would generate a lot of funds, but only from the people who could least afford the hikes. It would make it harder to start your own business and it would make it harder to work your way out of poverty, or save up for college. It would make it harder for people to feed their children.
That's why the rich campaign to close them rather than raise taxes. Because it wouldn't effect the rich. It only hurts the poor.
Why do you want to hurt the poor more, Starship?
edited 5th Apr '13 10:22:56 AM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickDepends on the loophole, but you've got a point.
As for offshore shenanigans, a financial transaction tax would take some of the bite out of that. There's also the fact that there are some tax havens safely within the U.S. sphere of influence ripe for the picking. What's really stopping a President from sending the Marines to the Cayman Islands?
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Because starting a war with countries that can't defend themselves looks really bad? Because it would cost more money to do that than would be gained from raiding the tax shelters? Because it would make the US look like a bully and possibly get economic sanctions passed on the US?
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickWar hell, we'd leave as soon as we found enough evidence to prosecute the crooks in our country. Not that it would be difficult.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

Yeah and yet the number will still go up if you didn't tax the poor.