Reply With Quote
But Capitilism is the only method by which every human being has equal rights to do anything he wants to with enough "hard work" !!!
^You're Republican freind is irresponsible. He needs to prioritize his money.
But Capitilism is the only method by which every human being has equal rights to do anything he wants to with enough "hard work" !!!
Capitalism, is the only economic system that actually awards "hard work".
Socialism does not recognize hardwork since working hard won't be awarded.
Tell that to the 2 billion Chinese.Socialism does not recognize hardwork since working hard won't be awarded.
Every country is some mix of socialism and Capitalism, it just so happens that despite our large economy, as a percentage of our GDP, Americans do less for the poor, mentally ill, disadvantaged, old, and past war veterans than any other developed country.
Gee dan, we could do like your "model" countries and just kill them. Would
that be okay?
China is fascist now.
sad, but true. State run capitalism.
Now ES, I want you to read this column from todays E-N and tell me one more
time how the rich are screwing over everyone. Okay!
T.R. Fehrenbach: 'Fix' the tax code? Someone will pay
Web Posted: 04/30/2006 12:00 AM CDT
San Antonio Express-News
I planned to publish this column prior to April 17, but then I read that: 1) we devote about 3.5 billion hours to doing tax returns (26 hours each); 2) we spend $140 billion on tax preparation and compliance each year; 3) some 61 percent of American taxpayers hire professionals to do the dirty work. I didn't want to add to the agony or interfere with the business.
You know all that or some version of it. Every year, at least since Jimmy Carter said our tax system is a disgrace to the human race, publications and politicians rail at its complexity and confusion. Of course, you know nothing is ever done, or will be done, about it. In fact, the system keeps getting worse.
Blame Democrats. Democrats generally resist real tax reform because they fear it would result in lowered taxes and revenues, which is against their religion. Or give the rich a bigger break, which would break their little redistributionist hearts.
Blame Republicans. Republicans believe in tax reform, but not if it tampers with current exceptions and exemptions that they have craftily engineered. The GOP approach is incremental, doubling the tax breaks for education costs and energy companies since 1995. This adds to complexity: Since 2000, Republican Congresses and president have added some 20,000 pages to federal tax regs, also increasing the number of IRS forms from 475 to 582.
Nobody now approves of the tricky alternative minimum tax, designed to catch the super-rich (who, being able to hire super-accountants, largely avoid it) but now snags millions of middle-class folks. The AMT punishes deductions and exemptions, such as those for medical care, dependents and state taxes. However, the AMT is not triggered by munis, that is, tax-free income. Local governments had too much clout in Congress for that. However, what do you replace the AMT with, if you give it a deserved deep-six?
To reform the tax system, it inevitably requires that we tax somebody less, and somebody more, than we do now. If you believe this is politically easy, observe the pain of the Texas Legislature juggling school taxes.
Unfortunately, much of the tax-cutting of recent years has not resulted in as much relief as proponents claim. This is because it was offset by cutting exemptions and deductions. For example (and the funny papers rarely point out this), people with incomes of $110,000 lose credits and exemptions, which actually raises their tax rate.
The most common gripe about the tax code is that it's not fair. The question, however, is, what is fair? What one family might see as fair another sees as robbery.
No tax code in foreseeable time frames is going to reduce American incomes to anything approaching equality or engage in much greater redistribution than we have now. The Framers deliberately left economic parity out of the Cons ution. I think most current unfairness is created by the code's byzantine complexity, in which nearly every economic activity is treated differently. Actually, the code is quite progressive — more progressive than formerly, even after the so-called tax breaks for the rich.
The top 0.1 percent now pay at an over-30 percent rate; the top 1 percent slightly under that; the top 20 percent average out at 25 percent; the middle 20 percent at 15 percent; and the bottom 20 percent pay at less than 5 percent.
This is clearly progressive — unless the aim is redistribution. We already have some of that with the earned income tax credit; lower-income households with children have a negative 10 percent tax rate. The bottom 60 percent pay only 0.6 percent of all income tax.
Forty-three million filers (32 percent) pay nothing or receive payment. Most Americans pay more payroll taxes, which go to Social Security and Medicare, than income tax.
In short, the poor derive far more from government than they pay for. Blame unfairness on society, not the tax code.
Online at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/....1365939a.html
================================================== =============
Now did you notice how many people don't pay any taxes or in the negative
tax rate?
Who do you think spends money to open these new businesses dumbass?
Poor people?
^^Who are you talking to?
to the original post.
Most of the time here I go off the original post.. Cause I have almost every leftist here on ignore.
I think this is where human beings as a whole come to a fork in the road: one road is labelled "Socaialism" with all its proven faults, and the other is labelled "Capitalism" with all its effects we see today.
The majority seem to take Capitilism route because of its better results than Socialism. However, the faults are still present in the Capitalistic System. Furthermore, due to bling bling and consumer driven morals we have today, we actually see many of the adverse effects in a good light. I think its time someone smart in this so called greatest country in the world comes up with a better system.
Think outside the box. There is no excluse dichotomy of Capitalistism and Socialism outside the human brain. We created these sytems, and can create more. Why stop at Capitalism?
1% collecting 63% of economic growth is a moral tragedy: a sin. Any true believer of any ing faith would realize that. All that money in 1% of people's hands, yet we still have starving people in the world, and in our own country.
This country's on the highway to unless we change something. The gap between Uber Rich and Moderately poor will continue to widen.
I REMEMBER IT'S BEEN WIDENING SINCE I WAS LIKE 10 YEARS OLD. Since back in the day, I remember hearing news like this. And it continues. Probably has been widening since the moment we set up our independent economy.
At what point will it be too much?
And this doesn't apply to all you upper-middle and upper class neocons who want so desperately to be in that top 1% that you ignore the common welfare and pretend you are rich too. Ya'll are posers, and yes-men. I think it will "be too much" once you yourselves start experience the effects of this gap widening.
Actually he was agreeing with you, re-read his post.
It is hard for lower and middle class americans to achieve income growth because of the fact that they have to spend almost all of their income on "the basics", food, shelter, etc.
They have little or no money to invest to increase income. Aggravating this cycle is the lack of financial education that robs them of the ability to make good economic decisions when they DO have available capital.
Wealthy types do tend to spend more on food and shelter and so forth, but they still have quite a bit of spare capital to invest.
Both poverty and wealth cycles tend to be stable over time for the above reasons. The thing about the increasing share of national wealth going to the wealthy is that investment income tends to follow an exponential growth model, as more income becomes available to invest.
You are so full of it. "It is hard for lower and middle class americans to achieve income growth because of the fact that they have to spend almost all of their income on "the basics", food, shelter, etc." You really do need a course in reality.
Ok explain why this is incorrect, and please try to use reasoning backed by some economics, your non sequitur is a bit puzzling to me.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 04-30-2006 at 05:18 PM.
Because what you said is an untrue statement. All their money
on basic's. Get real.
"because I said so" is not an explanation. Please elaborate as to WHY it is untrue.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Attilla the Hun would be a "leftist" in your book.
I think it's funny that you consider me a leftist, BTW.
I understand how the economic model is supposed to work. If it were working, and the wealthy were spending the money to open the new businesses so that the middle class would get better-paying jobs, then the economic numbers would look different.
So something is not working.
I think you are largely correct. Lots of people don't pay taxes. However, I don't think you grasp my point.Now did you notice how many people don't pay any taxes or in the negative
tax rate?
What has taken place is a shift of the tax burden from the investor class to the middle class professionals and to small business owners, not to the working poor or lower middle class.
This is not Republicans preying on Democrats. This is one group of Republicans exploiting another Republican cons uency, and figuring we won't notice because we are conditioned to think that anybody who asks questions must be a pinko liberal communist Jane-Fonda-loving hippie protest-marching . You and Vashner have been conditioned quite nicely.
Both parties are in the tow of big business and don't give a crap what happens to ordinary folks. The Republicans try to pull the wool over our eyes with "tradtional values" while they rob us blind. The Democrats try to pull the wool over our eyes by getting us addicted to the government dole, so they can keep us poor and stupid. They're all out to get theirs, and to feast at the trough of tax revenues for themselves and their buddies.
In the blue states, where the cost of living is exorbitant, what RG says is largely true. One might ask whether execution of the local ideology has anything to do with the inhospitable economic environment for the working classes.
But that has nothing to do with my point.
It is true in both the blue and the red states. The red states tend to have lower costs of living, but also lower levels of income and education. I grew up on one red state and moved to another, heh.
I will not hold my breath waiting for Xray to back up his knee-jerk, "whatever-RandomGuy-said-must-be-wrong-because-HE-said-it" post. I merely hold up the lack of intelligent, reasoned response as proof that Ray couldn't reason his way out of a paper bag...
You response shows you have no sense of reasoning. By your standardsIt is true in both the blue and the red states. The red states tend to have lower costs of living, but also lower levels of income and education. I grew up on one red state and moved to another, heh.
I will not hold my breath waiting for Xray to back up his knee-jerk, "whatever-RandomGuy-said-must-be-wrong-because-HE-said-it" post. I merely hold up the lack of intelligent, reasoned response as proof that Ray couldn't reason his way out of a paper bag...
most people are on the verge of starvation. Not many people stay in the
"lower levels of income" their whole work life. They move on up the ladder as
they gain in experience and longevity on the job. Your lack of common
sense shows with every one of your post. Just as most people do not
continue to hold burger flipper jobs their whole life, although some, through
their own choice may stay with the chain and work themselves up into
management positions, which pay some pretty good money. Just as
some who go to work for Wal-Mart, work themselves on up in management and make
some big bucks.
You have given an accurate description of the kind of career one could expect back in the days when you were starting out.
It's not the same now. In Texas, it's better than in most places, because the economy is growing.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
