PDA

View Full Version : Why do you think the rich should pay more?



Adam Wood
12-18-2010, 11:16 AM
Oh goodie! These are always a hoot (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x30740)!


WCGreen (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:40 PM
Original message
Why do you think the rich should pay more?



What is your justification?

To me it boils down to this; the Unites States is a very wide open country that allows for the free exchange of ideas and the ability for almost anyone to take a stab at the American Dream. (Myth, I know, but hear me out.)

The flip side of this is that once you made it, you are pretty safe and you can take steps within our system of laws and regulations, to protect your wealth and also to protect your property. (Most law suits in this country are not filed by injury prone ambulance chasers but by patent attorneys trying to protect their clients' Wealth.)

So my rational is that the system is gamed to protect those who have made it. Simply put; they should pay more.

Now the flip side of that, the dark side, if you will, is that if things go in the shitter, and they could very well given the smoldering feelings of angst festering out there in the in-between land, they, meaning the wealthy, have the most to lose. Therefor, they should pay more.

Plus the fact that those in the bottom rungs of the socioeconomic scale tend to spend all that they earn so putting more money in the hands of this strata is best for those at the top as they tend to own everything anyway.

My thinking is that if they continue to not pay their fair share then the chances of their safe refuge here in the good old US of A could very well be put in jeopardy.

So what is your justification.IOW, the "rich" should pay more to soothe WC's desire for cosmic sameness.


stray cat (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why do people deserve other peoples money? Will you pay for my vacation?

How many DUers would gladly give 50% of their income to help Haitians?
:eek:

There are screens all over DUmmy Land with holes in them because people were banging the alert button so hard. :D


TalkingDog (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
56. It's not "your" money unless you earned it with your own labor.

http://i822.photobucket.com/albums/zz147/CalCarpenter/Fwright.jpg
Yes, of course. Only ditch-diggers actually earn money. Everyone else who invests and risks his own personal fortune to build a business aren't legitimately earning anything. :rolleyes:



craigmatic (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. It's very simple- they've got the majority of the wealth in this country as

as result of trickle down economics for the last 30 years. Tax rates were higher under presidents FDR-Carter and the economy was good for most of those years as opposed to the bbom and bust cycle we've been on for the last 30. Raising taxes on the rich is a way of paying down our debt and deficit.
LMAO! Yep! Things were great under FDR! That whole 12 years of the Great Depression were a real barrel of laughs. The Misery Index under Carter was actually a measure of just how fantastic things were.


Digit (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
28. Because saying the rich create jobs is bull

Why can't you give the tax cuts to the ones actually CREATING American jobs and instead of tax cuts to EVERYONE in the upper echelon?
Trickle down doesn't work...never did...never will.

And while we are at it, social security tax should be paid by those making over 75K.

Throw us a bone you tightwads.That's right. The wealthy don't create jobs. Welfare queens, apparently, are the ones actually creating jobs.


Warren DeMontague (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
29. I think anyone who voted for Bush or supported the Iraq Invasion should pay more.

Talk about a waste of money.Great idea! In a couple of weeks, we can start legislation that says that anyone who voted for Obama or supported failulous should pay more in taxes.

How's that working out for ya, Warren?


notesdev (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
34. Because the only way to get rich these days

is to be a thiefYou mean like George Soros, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Diane Feinstein, John Kerry, Michael Moore, George Clooney, Sean Penn....


EstimatedProphet (1000+ posts) Sat Dec-18-10 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
61. Because they have moreWell, there you go. Just pure envy as a basis for public policy. Brilliant!

NJCardFan
12-18-2010, 11:20 AM
These people never cease to amaze me. The wealthy don't create jobs? Um, ok. I guess every business venture ever created was done so by someone living in poverty? What it all comes down to is that these people are just petulant little children who are jealous because another kid has more toys.

MrsSmith
12-18-2010, 12:18 PM
The latest Wells Fargo/Gallup Small Business Index finds that small business owners today work an oursaverage of 52 hours per week. The majority, 57 percent work six days a week and more than 20 percent work all seven days. Sixty-Five percent of respondents say that they make time outside of work for things that are important to them.

The small business owners surveyed average two weeks of vacation per year with 14 percent taking no vacation at all. Some of those who take vacation work part of that time (phone, emails, etc.).

http://www.accountingweb.com/item/101254

As this was from 2005, I have no doubt that small business owners now work longer hours, longer weeks, and take less vacation thanks to the great increase in Unemployment Tax they must pay, and the continuing uncertainly in the labor market making hiring unwise.

Not that the DUmmies care. Most have no clue what it means to keep a job, let alone put in the kind of long hours a small business owner works. Nor do they have the concept of the difference between 52 hours of work and putting hours on the clock.

My sister-in-law has been working 10 and 12 hour days at a retail location hours from home, 6 or 7 days a week, trying to get the business to "go." They managed to close one day last week...in order to move the entire inventory to a different location in the mall and set everything back up again. Anyone with the gumption to do that job wouldn't be posting on the DUmp.

If the DUmpMonkeys don't want fairness, what they want is to sit on their hind-ends and skim the cream off the milk that was produced by someone else, pasteurized by someone else, bottled by someone else... Even that isn't accurate...they also want someone else to skim the cream, and then hand it to them.

Calypso Jones
12-18-2010, 01:13 PM
I think it's awful and will backfire on the rest of us at some point in the future. YOu cannot require a certain group of people to do more than what you are asking the rest of the population to do. It is unconstitutional. just PERIOD.

swirling_vortex
12-18-2010, 07:49 PM
gateley (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't. I just don't think they should be able to take advantage of loopholes that

allow them to pay LESS.


stray cat (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. That's why I hope they come up with a flat tax percentage with absolutely no deductions


Yeesh, is it opposite day on DU? I'm surprised that these guys haven't bene banned for talking down the precious "progressive" tax.

3. Things work better when they do

When the tax rates were much higher on the upper income folks the economy was better, the middle class prospered and it appears that the wealthy still did just fine. It worked so why not return to that model?
I can easily say the high tax rates created a drag on the economy during the 1970s. But there's certainly more to the problem than tax rates, there are also factors such as the complexity of the code (which was much simpler in the 1930s), the different kinds of taxes, and the target of compliance. Plus, you also have to factor in government regulation, its monetary policy, and its spending. So yes, you could have a 90% tax, but have only one kind of tax and still potentially be better off than having 10 kinds of taxes at various percentages with different brackets. Of course, choosing either or is still a bad choice.

The thing I see with liberals supporting higher tax rates is that they seem to believe that as you earn more income, you work less. That in itself creates a problem because you trap the lower income people into staying into that system.

craigmatic (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. It's very simple- they've got the majority of the wealth in this country as

as result of trickle down economics for the last 30 years. Tax rates were higher under presidents FDR-Carter and the economy was good for most of those years as opposed to the bbom and bust cycle we've been on for the last 30. Raising taxes on the rich is a way of paying down our debt and deficit.
There's no guarantee that such an increase would automatically gain wealth. Plus, Obama's addition to the deficit has caused the federal budget to exceed the GDP. Therefore, you could extract all of the wealth out of the economy and you still wouldn't be able to pay down the deficit. In addition, Maryland implemented a millionaire tax in 2008 that caused their revenues to shrink instead. The solution is to cut down the deficit over a period of years until you can balance it.

Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Citizens should repay in proportion to the benefit they gain from living ...

in a free society. The wealthy benefit enormously, the poor,not so much.
That's a rather silly comment. First, there are 5-figure earners that would be classified as "wealthy" by you and the government based on their investment portfolios for things such as retirement. Then, you also have to figure that the rich didn't get rich because they used some government service to get there. Finally, taxing the rich doesn't mean that you are going to get that money. The government gets that money.

haele (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
49. The more I have in my bank account, the more resouces I use from the local government -

regulatory resources to protect "my money", my purchases, my sales; educational resources, more medical resources, roads (I can now go more places) and recreational resources, better and fresher food, more local infrastructure than when I was poorer, more water for my big assed lawn or garden, more power for my home, more oil for my cars - all of which have some sort of regulation or local infrastructure and "spread the costs" activities that need to be provided to ensure that I get what I pay for and can afford the costs.
If we were down to "government drowned in a bathtub" level of infrastructure,unless I was in the top 1%, I'd be dirt poor because 1) there's no frontier left for me to homestead on, and 2) Everything that is "comfortable" in my life would end up being way too expensive for me to, say, ensure that the $100 black market 5 lb bag of milled grain I just bought was actually 5 lbs of grain instead of 2.5 lbs of grain and 2.5 lbs of powdered concrete.

I don't think I'd like living in Pinochet's Argentina, Papa Doc's Haiti, or modern Somalia, where the wealthy 1% become Warlords, and everyone else fights to stay on their good side.

That's why I pay taxes.

Haele
Again, another silly comment. Do you really think that oil would stop flowing, your bank account would dry up, education would disappear, and food would be contaminated if the government wasn't there to regulate and subsidize it? You do realize that there are competitors in the marketplace that bring you those services for the lowest possible price, right?

Digit (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
28. Because saying the rich create jobs is bull

Why can't you give the tax cuts to the ones actually CREATING American jobs and instead of tax cuts to EVERYONE in the upper echelon?
Trickle down doesn't work...never did...never will.

And while we are at it, social security tax should be paid by those making over 75K.

Throw us a bone you tightwads.
So who creates the jobs then? The poor? The middle class? The rich create jobs because they have the necessary capital in order to start businesses that allow numbnuts like you to make a wage and a decent living. If you work for the government, then you should be extra grateful for the rich because they pay the majority of the taxes so you can have a government job.

lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Fri Dec-17-10 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
50. 1% in a country should not control 55 percent of the country's wealth.
Please move to Venezuela and experience the "people's paradise" yourself. Comes with corrupt government, stagnant economy, and lots of poor people. But hey, at least the "rich" doesn't control the majority of the wealth, just Chavez.

SarasotaRepub
12-18-2010, 09:39 PM
The USA has a "Problem".

Present a problem to a Democrat and the answer is "Raise Taxes".

Present a problem to a Republican and the answer is "Innovation".

lacarnut
12-19-2010, 12:35 AM
The stupid is strong in the thinking of liberals. The rich should pay more and if they do not pay their fair share (increased taxes), their safe refuge in the US may be put in jeopardy. Wrong. They will just move to the Caribbean. The dummies do not realize that the rich usually get richer in bad economic times and the poor get poorer.

AmPat
12-19-2010, 09:30 AM
Well, if poor people are so valuable to the economy and they are the ones who generate wealth, why don't we try it? Let us cease all entitlements today and place more of these paragons of untapped wealth into poverty? Overnight we will see hundreds of thousands of job creators and wealth builders breaking into the millionaire club. Our economy will turn around and we will have thousands more millionaires to loot.

m00
12-19-2010, 10:41 AM
Even that isn't accurate...they also want someone else to skim the cream, and then hand it to them.

Even that isn't accurate, they don't just want it... they are entitled to it.

m00
12-19-2010, 10:47 AM
(1000+ posts)

95. Because people like me will kill them and take it anyways if the country falls apart.

It's in their best interest to keep people happy and satisfied and society running smoothly. But they never learn. They never study history

Well, if the wealthy are Republicans, and Republicans are gun nuts... good luck with that.

NJCardFan
12-19-2010, 11:19 AM
But they never learn. They never study history
Coming from people who believe that socialism can work even though everywhere it is tried, it either becomes a brutal oppressive dictatorship or ends up going to shit like in Europe.