Republicans: I WARNED YOU.

[Protectionist]

If one believes in a progressive taxation system then one ought love the so called trickle down. Also, there ought to be progressive systems for government assistance, medical care, and the cost of everything else in life.

There IS a progressive system for government assistance, including medical care. You have to be low income to get them.

With food stamps, the higher your income, the less benefit you get (on a sliding scale). When my Social Security recently went up a few bucks, in consequence, my food stamps went down a few bucks.

 

[misterveritis]

We all belong to the government

That employer will have money to pay his employees if he gets SALES in the stores. And those SALES are boosted by more AMERICANS working and spending their paychecks. And that (for one example) and quite well come from millions more AMERICANS getting jobs which came from the $$$ of increased taxation.

And I guess you just can't let go of that word "trickLe", but I guess you were referring to PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS. With it, there's no great effort in going up at all. You just tax the people who can easily afford to pay. Hire lots of badly needed workers and you fix the economy with infrastructure repair, immigration control, crime control, etc) Get it ?

In your opinion then we all belong to the government who can spend our money better than we can.
Do you give what little you earn to the government and then wait for the handout? Given your beliefs if you don't why not?

You are a collectivist. We understand. You are the wrecker of entire nations. You must be defeated.

 

[misterveritis]

The Taker Among Us

There IS a progressive system for government assistance, including medical care. You have to be low income to get them.

With food stamps, the higher your income, the less benefit you get (on a sliding scale). When my Social Security recently went up a few bucks, in consequence, my food stamps went down a few bucks.

And you are a taker. It all becomes clear.

 

[misterveritis]

What were the effective tax rates?

Over the past 60 years:

Best GDP growth and Job Growth were at 75-80% taxation on the rich (PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS)

Close 2ND BEST Job & GDP Growth were at 91-94% taxation on the rich (PERCOLATE UP ECONOMICS)

Some people only tell a part of the truth because they only know part of the truth?

Others lie to support their political agenda.

What was the effective tax rates over the past 60 years?

 

[tecoyah]

In my opinion the United States was grown first by an industrial economy, then by an industrial war economy.

Trickle down is a catch phrase....nothing more.

 

[Protectionist]

There you go again. "Greater benefits" that you use there myp, is nothing more than the wealthier of We the People keeping their own money. Progressive thought process very much considers not taxing the wealthy much more on the basis that they can afford it as a "benefit" those citizens are receiving. As if it's the government's money and allowing you to keep more than the average citizen makes is some kind of special favor or benefit.

Your opinion is absolutely and all wrong. And the anti-thesis of the building of America. The US had an income tax during the civil war, the Supreme Court ruled federal income taxes unconstitutional in 1895 I believe, we the smarter people of course amended our constitution in 1913 and never looked back.

Allowing you to keep MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more than the average citizen makes, is some kind of special favor or benefit. Absolutely. ANd one which is damaging to the whole society,

For the economic benefit of a society it is always better to have large amounts of money going to the bottom rungs of the class structure than to the top. At the bottom, people who have nothing, go to the stores (AKA the economy) to buy the things they don't have. At the top, the rich who already have all these things, don't go to the stores to buy what they already have.

Making it even worse, when the rich DO go out spending their money, they do a very large percentage of it OUTSIDE THE US (mostly Europe and the Caribbean), taking $$$ out of the US economy (similar to the destructive remittances$$$ of immigrants) (whereas the poorer people spend their money in their own local communities, helping the US and their local communities)

 

[Protectionist]

Agree.

We, here in America, do not have a tax problem. We have a spending problem.

Gee, what an original thought. :giggle: It's only spoken about 100,000 times every day by every psuedo-Conservative Reaganite, pretending that we don't also need to raise taxes on the rich (as 80% of the American people want).

I'd say we have a moderate spending problem, and a huge taxation problem.

 

[Protectionist]

Is everything "collective" with you?
Other than the cronies that the Marxist rewards who else receives billions to "trickle down"?

Is it possible you have no understanding of freedom and of liberty? Is it possible that you are completely clueless about economic freedom? Is it possible that you do not believe that you should be able to decide for yourself while I decide for me...all without government intervention?

It's not only possible that I don't believe you should be able to decide (entirely) for yourself...all without government intervention, it's a FACT that I most certainly don't believe that. Without government intervention (from regulatory agencies) we wouldn't have to worry about crazed gunmen killing people in schools and movie theaters. We'd have people dying like flies from bad food, unsafe cars, flammable clothing, dangerous pharmaceuticals, unsafe construction materials and methods, etc.

 

[Protectionist]

Old enough to realize this "trickle down" dog of an argument you're trying to convince me of won't hunt.

Sounds like you might not be old enough. Those born after about 1970 never noticed a tax system in place with NORMAL taxation. These young-uns think the abnormally low taxes (on the rich) of the past 30 years are normal.

 

[Gottago]

Gee, what an original thought. :giggle: It's only spoken about 100,000 times every day by every psuedo-Conservative Reaganite, pretending that we don't also need to raise taxes on the rich (as 80% of the American people want).

I'd say we have a moderate spending problem, and a huge taxation problem.

I think you need this, Protectionist. Until you realize that a societal pool is a whole lot different than a socialistic society, you'll not be protecting anybody.

 

[Stonewall]

In my opinion the United States was grown first by an industrial economy, then by an industrial war economy.

Trickle down is a catch phrase....nothing more.

It's reality, like it or not.

 

[Stonewall]

Sounds like you might not be old enough. Those born after about 1970 never noticed a tax system in place with NORMAL taxation. These young-uns think the abnormally low taxes (on the rich) of the past 30 years are normal.

"Sounds like?"

 

[Stonewall]

Allowing you to keep MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more than the average citizen makes, is some kind of special favor or benefit. Absolutely. ANd one which is damaging to the whole society,

Marxist much?

For the economic benefit of a society it is always better to have large amounts of money going to the bottom rungs of the class structure than to the top. At the bottom, people who have nothing, go to the stores (AKA the economy) to buy the things they don't have. At the top, the rich who already have all these things, don't go to the stores to buy what they already have.

So...you believe it's the governments roll to make sure large sums of money are going to the "bottom rungs", Karl?

Your favorite person in history, Lenin or Marx?

 

[tecoyah]

It's reality, like it or not.

I suppose we have a different form of reality...I base mine on historical fact, documented and verified data, and personal perception of observation.

On what is your version based?

 

[David]

Marxist much?



So...you believe it's the governments roll to make sure large sums of money are going to the "bottom rungs", Karl?

Your favorite person in history, Lenin or Marx?

You know, naming dead people isn't much of an insult... You really suck at trolling.

 

[Stonewall]

You know, naming dead people isn't much of an insult... You really suck at trolling.

Most people in "history" are dead, that is correct and why would a leftist be upset about Karl Marx?

Quick exit in the Iraq thread, you're much better at addressing members, content it seems, ain't your bag.

Oh well.

 

[Stonewall]

On what is your version based?

Reality. This nation wasn't built nor turned into an industrial powerhouse and then super power from the bottom up. And I'm sorry for your confusion on the matter.

 

[tecoyah]

Reality. This nation wasn't built nor turned into an industrial powerhouse and then super power from the bottom up. And I'm sorry for your confusion on the matter.

Okay...I now understand the likely hood of debate with you.


I agree with the sorrow.

 

[Stonewall]

Okay...I now understand the likely hood of debate with you.

But, the likelihood(I'm sure just a mistype on your part) you'll learn spelling and some proper grammer is high when debating me!

Seriously, let's just take one example because you're probably using his operating system or clone of it. Bill Gates' innovation.......an entire market created, you're living through exactly how this nation was founded and built and yet, cannot see forest thru trees.

I'd like to explain it to you, you just seem a tad argumentative and I'm not even sure there is a term "likely hood."

Is that Robin's brother, Likely?

 

[tecoyah]

But, the likelihood(I'm sure just a mistype on your part) you'll learn spelling and some proper grammer is high when debating me!

Seriously, let's just take one example because you're probably using his operating system or clone of it. Bill Gates' innovation.......an entire market created, you're living through exactly how this nation was founded and built and yet, cannot see forest thru trees.

I'd like to explain it to you, you just seem a tad argumentative and I'm not even sure there is a term "likely hood."

Is that Robin's brother, Likely?

Very well, yet i will refrain from correcting your "grammar".

I may have come off as somewhat "argumentative" due to my disagreement with your Premise...we generaly consider this to be a form of debate. In time, it is likely you will understand that when one questions the opinion presented by another, it is an invitation to discussion and exchange of ideas.

Until then however, I will simply smile at ineptitude.