Jump to content
Z09

Liz Warren suggested a 90% tax rate might work for America.....

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, maineman said:

you stating your opinion three times is not proving anything three times.  I can't believe you don't understand that!

 

I say that, if the infrastructure the rich  pay for benefits them to the tune of billions of dollars or commerce, they got a great deal.  the poor guy gets a road to drive to work.  They pay millions of dollars in taxes... and they make BILLIONS from the systems their tax dollars support.  The poor guy pays a lot of his hard earned money in taxes - sales taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes,  gas taxes, and he doesn't get anywhere NEAR the return on his tax dollar investment.

 

Conservatism isn't necessarily a mental disorder... it is just an indication of a lazy herd mentality.  You actually buy the sake oil the clown sells you.  Unbelievable!

 

And I think it's funny that you call ME a Marxist for advocating a progressive income tax, and you call Coolidge the greatest president of the 20th Century EVEN THOUGH he advocated a progressive income tax.

 

Fucking HYPOCRITE.

 

GFY

I think the fact a 40 ton tractor trailer causes 5000 times more wear and tear to our roads adds further support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maineman said:

you stating your opinion three times is not proving anything three times.  I can't believe you don't understand that!

 

 

I understand it all.  You don’t accept the poor don’t pay for anything.

 

nothing

 

they don’t pay.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fourputt said:

I think the fact a 40 ton tractor trailer causes 5000 times more wear and tear to our roads adds further support.

 

 

They pay pay for that wear and tear.   

 

WHY DONT YOU KNOW THAT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 4:52 AM, maineman said:

you clearly have absolutely no idea about how a marginal tax rate is applied.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

They pay pay for that wear and tear.   

 

WHY DONT YOU KNOW THAT?

Not 5000 times what a single owner of a vehicle pays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fourputt said:

Not 5000 times what a single owner of a vehicle pays.

 

They don’t cause 5000 times the damage.   That’s not how it works. Belive it or not, roads can handle the weight.

 

what is it about liberalism and the obsession with  taking money from everywhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, fourputt said:

I think the fact a 40 ton tractor trailer causes 5000 times more wear and tear to our roads adds further support.

+10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

I understand it all.  You don’t accept the poor don’t pay for anything.

 

nothing

 

they don’t pay.  

they pay sales tax.  they pay payroll tax. 

 

you're a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, fourputt said:

I think the fact a 40 ton tractor trailer causes 5000 times more wear and tear to our roads adds further support.

Do you have any idea how much it costs just to run one of those rigs down the road?

 

It's a whole lot more than buying a car tag once a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, maineman said:

they pay sales tax.  they pay payroll tax. 

 

you're a liar.

 

 

Everyone pays sales tax and everyone who works pays payroll taxes.  Payroll taxes fund Medicare and SS. 

 

Lets be hinest about who who is paying for nearly everything.   Your play on a disproportionate benefit is a lie.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rippy38 said:

Do you have any idea how much it costs just to run one of those rigs down the road?

 

It's a whole lot more than buying a car tag once a year.

 

 

Exactly.   They are ultra regulated and taxed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

Everyone pays sales tax and everyone who works pays payroll taxes.  Payroll taxes fund Medicare and SS. 

 

Lets be hinest about who who is paying for nearly everything.   Your play on a disproportionate benefit is a lie.  

you said they paid no taxes... you're a liar.  own it.

liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, maineman said:

you said they paid no taxes... you're a liar.  own it.

liar.

 

The discussion is ALWAYS FEDERAL INCOME TAXES...   they don't pay any.

 

Second, sales taxes are one of the  few fair taxes we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2019 at 8:46 AM, maineman said:

 they screw over the workers by paying them a less than living wage...

What you babbling about, moron?  How the hell does the cost of living make any difference in whether a worker is being screwed?  Suppose you have a worker that is producing $5/hr of value to their employer and their employer is generously paying them TWICE that amount at $10/hr, but some idiot lib has determined that the living wage for their location is $15/hr.  Would you still foolishly claim that this evil employer is "screwing" this worker, even though they are generously paying them TWICE what they are producing, just because it is less than the cost of living?  Are you really that damn retarded? 

 

Why the hell should some evil employer be responsible for paying their workers more than they are producing for them, nimrod?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2019 at 3:29 PM, Olivaw said:

The country is running out of money and infrastructure is crumbling. One  solution is to raise the marginal rate. What could be simpler? 

Where is your evidence that your supposedly "simple" solution of raising the top marginal tax rates will result in significant tax revenue increases, dunce?  There is a tremendous amount of historical evidence that shows the exact opposite- Link.

 

There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are reduced, the economy's growth rate improves and living standards increase. Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance, history tells us that tax revenues grow and "rich" taxpayers pay more tax when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a lower share of the tax burden - a consequence that should lead class-warfare politicians to support lower tax rates.

 

Conversely, periods of higher tax rates are associated with sub par economic performance and stagnant tax revenues. In other words, when politicians attempt to "soak the rich," the rest of us take a bath.

 

 

Link2

Democrats still think that under the current tax code they will be able to raise more revenue by letting marginal rates go up. But that ignores the fact that the federal government has never been able to get much more than 19 percent of GDP in tax revenues, and sustain that level for very long, no matter how high the top marginal tax rate goes. Consider this chart:

Chart%20image_0.png

It shows the historical path of federal taxation as a percentage of GDP (using the earliest records available from the OMB) alongside top-marginal-tax-rate data from the Tax Policy Center. From 1930 to 2010, tax-revenue collection in the United States has never topped 20.9 percent, averaging 16.5 percent of GDP over 80 years. This despite the drastic historical fluctuation in tax rates on the wealthiest Americans.

 

This reality is called Hauser’s Law, after Standford University professor Kurt Hauser, who had a very good piece in the Wall Street Journal this weekend:

Higher taxes discourage the “animal spirits” of entrepreneurship. When tax rates are raised, taxpayers are encouraged to shift, hide and underreport income. Taxpayers divert their effort from pro-growth productive investments to seeking tax shelters, tax havens and tax exempt investments. This behavior tends to dampen economic growth and job creation. Lower taxes increase the incentives to work, produce, save and invest, thereby encouraging capital formation and jobs. Taxpayers have less incentive to shelter and shift income.

 

 

 

Oops, there goes your dumb little ignorant theory.  Now, go cowardly run away like a sniveling little pansy, just like you always do after I humiliate you, twit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that isn't true, if there is a 90%  marginal tax rate and you earn 1000 dollars you wont be paying 900 dollars.

Assuming Warren goes back to the Eisenhower years, between deductions, and loopholes you would be paying close to 60% after the deductions.

 

That is what she means, and even by that standard she is still nuts and she is economically illiterate because those who earn money from capital gains will not be paying 90% even with the dedications, she doesn't understand that her 90% plan hurts those who earn paychecks for a living, not those who are in business, gets dividends, capital gains, entertainers, athletes etc.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2019 at 6:46 AM, EltonJohnson said:

 

The discussion is ALWAYS FEDERAL INCOME TAXES...   they don't pay any.

 

Second, sales taxes are one of the  few fair taxes we have.

No, the DO pay income taxes.  They just don't pay as much because (read this closely) THEY DON'T MAKE AS MUCH. 

 

It's not a difficult concept....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RollingRock said:

No, the DO pay income taxes.  They just don't pay as much because (read this closely) THEY DON'T MAKE AS MUCH

 

 

47% of the  workers in the  USA do NOT...   NOT...  pay  Federal  Income Taxes

 

1 minute ago, RollingRock said:

It's not a difficult concept....

 

 

It  apparently is for some

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

47% of the  workers in the  USA do NOT...   NOT...  pay  Federal  Income Taxes

 

 

 

It  apparently is for some

they pay many other taxes, however.... many of which are regressive in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2019 at 11:07 PM, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

I understand it all.  You don’t accept the poor don’t pay for anything.

 

nothing

 

they don’t pay. 

 

This is nonsense! If they but stuff in 48 states, they pay sales tax. If they own a home, they pay property taxes.If they rent a home, they pay their landlord's property taxes. If they drive, they pay fuel taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:
On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 11:07 PM, EltonJohnson said:

 

 

I understand it all.  You don’t accept the poor don’t pay for anything.

 

nothing

 

they don’t pay. 

 

This is nonsense! If they but stuff in 48 states, they pay sales tax. If they own a home, they pay property taxes.If they rent a home, they pay their landlord's property taxes. If they drive, they pay fuel taxes.

We're talking about Federal taxes wizard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RollingRock said:

No, the DO pay income taxes.  They just don't pay as much because (read this closely) THEY DON'T MAKE AS MUCH. 

 

It's not a difficult concept....

 

Everyone pays some sort of tax, depending on which State they live in whether you are illegal, undocumented, overstayed your visa or a citizen , but we are not talking about that, we are talking about Federal income taxes.

 

47% of the people do not pay federal income tax.

 

You may say that its because they don't earn a lot to start, some of it is true, but the bottom line the 1% pays more of the federal income tax, and middle class and working middle class gets screwed into paying more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

Where is your evidence that your supposedly "simple" solution of raising the top marginal tax rates will result in significant tax revenue increases, dunce?  There is a tremendous amount of historical evidence that shows the exact opposite- Link.

 

There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are reduced, the economy's growth rate improves and living standards increase. Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance, history tells us that tax revenues grow and "rich" taxpayers pay more tax when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a lower share of the tax burden - a consequence that should lead class-warfare politicians to support lower tax rates.

 

Conversely, periods of higher tax rates are associated with sub par economic performance and stagnant tax revenues. In other words, when politicians attempt to "soak the rich," the rest of us take a bath.

 

 

Link2

Democrats still think that under the current tax code they will be able to raise more revenue by letting marginal rates go up. But that ignores the fact that the federal government has never been able to get much more than 19 percent of GDP in tax revenues, and sustain that level for very long, no matter how high the top marginal tax rate goes. Consider this chart:

Chart%20image_0.png

It shows the historical path of federal taxation as a percentage of GDP (using the earliest records available from the OMB) alongside top-marginal-tax-rate data from the Tax Policy Center. From 1930 to 2010, tax-revenue collection in the United States has never topped 20.9 percent, averaging 16.5 percent of GDP over 80 years. This despite the drastic historical fluctuation in tax rates on the wealthiest Americans.

 

This reality is called Hauser’s Law, after Standford University professor Kurt Hauser, who had a very good piece in the Wall Street Journal this weekend:

Higher taxes discourage the “animal spirits” of entrepreneurship. When tax rates are raised, taxpayers are encouraged to shift, hide and underreport income. Taxpayers divert their effort from pro-growth productive investments to seeking tax shelters, tax havens and tax exempt investments. This behavior tends to dampen economic growth and job creation. Lower taxes increase the incentives to work, produce, save and invest, thereby encouraging capital formation and jobs. Taxpayers have less incentive to shelter and shift income.

 

 

 

Oops, there goes your dumb little ignorant theory.  Now, go cowardly run away like a sniveling little pansy, just like you always do after I humiliate you, twit.

 

 

^Load of right wing BS. The  greatest period of economic growth in this country's history happened when marginal tax rates were at their highest. 

 

Poorly informed cons like Nighhawk mistake the short term stimulative effects of tax cuts (or any stimulus measure) during an economic downturn as a sign that lower taxes are always better for the country. They ignore evidence that the associated loss of government revenues and the increase in national debt can be devastating to the economic and social health of the country. 

 

Not sure who is behind this Nighthawk sok but this individual betrays an out-sized view of his own intellect. It's somewhat pathetic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olivaw said:

 

^Load of right wing BS. The  greatest period of economic growth in this country's history happened when marginal tax rates were at their highest. 


Poorly informed cons like Nighhawk mistake the short term stimulative effects of tax cuts (or any stimulus measure) during an economic downturn as a sign that lower taxes are always better for the country. They ignore evidence that the associated loss of government revenues

But you still have not shown any evidence that lowering the top marginal tax rates to the supposedly low levels of recent history has resulted in a significant loss of government revenues with a high degree of correlation, shit-for-brains.  In fact, I gave you solid evidence that this has clearly NOT happened, idiot.  Can you provide the evidence I have requested or will you cowardly dodge it again?

 

Good luck.

 

Quote

and the increase in national debt can be devastating to the economic and social health of the country. 

There are 2 ways that the national debt can increase, retard.  One way is to have lower revenue.  What is the other way, dimwit?  Now which one of these 2 ways has mainly led to the explosion in the national debt of the US, dumbass?  Feel free to refer to the simple chart I provided above if you aren't sure.
 

Quote

Not sure who is behind this Nighthawk sok but this individual betrays an out-sized view of his own intellect. It's somewhat pathetic. 

 

If I really don't have much "intellect", then it should be extremely easy for you to prove me wrong by providing the evidence I have requested instead of cowardly dodging it.  So what the fuck are you waiting for, shithead?

 

Good luck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×