It was mentioned in a post a couple of days ago about the difference between Democrats and Republicans. Of course if you go by what the OP put down it could have been called "The Saviors & The Devils". But moving along, I made a few comments on a few of the 'points' but didn't have room for these.:
The rich don't pay their fair share of taxes: I know that I'm not the only one who is sick to death of hearing this. Let me tell you a little secret that Obama won't tell you. The core Democrats don't care about increased taxes because 1) They are so rich that it doesn't matter to them. 2) They don't pay taxes, or 3) They work for the government.
Do you realize that the top 10% of families with income over $112,000 pay 70% of all the taxes? Does this sound like it's fair or that they don't pay their fair share? Then that money that they have earned is given away to other families. You know that Americans are the most generous & giving people in the world, when they can give willingly. We don't like to be forced to give. Also, there should be 'strings' attached, such as learning to help yourself to become independent and support yourself, which in turn allows someone else to be helped. It also gives people pride to take care of themselves & their families. The Democrats, on the other hand, want to give away more & more. Are they so dumb that they can't see that more & more people loosing their jobs, means less & less people in the workforce. And soon, there will be no more money.
But why don't the richest people have to pay taxes? Well here's an example of a real person and how he got rich. His name is George Kaiser, he is a good friend of Obama's and is a top Bundlers for his campaigns. He is #88 on the Billionaire's List and in 1 - 6 yr time period increased his net worth enough to make Forbes 400 Wealthiest Americans.
In 1997, the Internal Revenue Service sent Kaiser and his companies tax bills for more than $72 million in back taxes, interest and penalties, covering individual and corporate returns filed from 1986 to 1992. Kaiser filed returns showing his personal income averaging negative $860,000 between 1986 and 1991; his holding company, GBK Corp., and its subsidiaries reported an aggregate loss from 1989 to 1992 of $507,000. Only once did he report taxable income --of $11,699 -- which would equal $5.62 an hour. This whittled down from an average of $194 + million a year from income & assets of which he issued Grants of about 58 million /yr or just 1.7% of net assets.
How come Obama never talks about good old George? I know, he's too busy bashing Romney.
I have to take issue with the headline on Allison's article: "Barack Obama's other billionaire: How George Kaiser turned Oklahoma into his personal tax haven." Allison's focus is on Kaiser's avoidance of federal taxes and doesn't mention Oklahoma taxes. However, as long as we're on that subject:
OCPA's AccountAbilityOK online database of Oklahoma spending, revenues, payrolls, pensions, and tax credits shows that George Kaiser claimed over $29.5 million in state income tax credits for fiscal years ending 2009 and 2010, nearly all of it for venture capital investments. BOK Financial Corp and Subsidiaries claimed $10.5 million in Oklahoma tax credits for FY 2010; the bulk of it, $8.3 million, was the Space Transportation Vehicle Provider tax credit.
How about the back taxes owed by Bershire Hathway, one of Warren Buffet's company's? Don't hear much about those taxes either.
BTW: Today it was released that the number one platform issue at the DNC is more taxes on the weathly.
Quoting Xlandria:Do you realize that the top 10% of families with income over $112,000 pay 70% of all the taxes?
a) No they don't - you're looking just at income tax, not total taxation
b) What percentage of income is earned by the top 10%? If they earn 70% of the income / capital gains, then paying 70% of the tax sounds about right.
The top 10% of earners earned 43% of the income and paid 71% of the Federal Income Tax, the bottom 50% paid earned 13% of the income and paid 2% of the Federal Income Tax & half paid $0.
As for Capital Gains - these taxes, when kept low encourage investments which help fuel our economy. Lower taxes lead to more investments which more than offset those low tax rates.
I think there is a misconception that higher taxes will lower our deficit. Not so, it is a spending problem, so lower spending will lead to a lower deficit. Tax revenues correlate with economic growth . If you have true Tax Reform the economy will improve and taxes will not be raised.
Bottom line, we can tax until there's no more to tax, but until we cut spending we will not improve the deficit. Don't Obama's economists know anything? Oh wait, I forgot, he knows everything.
Quoting Clairwil:
Quoting Xlandria:Do you realize that the top 10% of families with income over $112,000 pay 70% of all the taxes?
a) No they don't - you're looking just at income tax, not total taxation
b) What percentage of income is earned by the top 10%? If they earn 70% of the income / capital gains, then paying 70% of the tax sounds about right.
Quoting rocketracer:How about the back taxes owed by Bershire Hathway, one of Warren Buffet's company's? Don't hear much about those taxes either.
BTW: Today it was released that the number one platform issue at the DNC is more taxes on the weathly.
In my experience, the tax *rate* neither encourages nor discourages investment. People may invest to avoid taxes altogether, but they don't typically refuse to invest due to the tax rate. The reason is because if they don't, inflation will eat away at what money they have. So the meme that if we lower taxes it will encourage investment is a myth.
Well, it's not my theory, it's what has been shown to happen in the past. But the main point is, and I'm sure you agree, that we have to cut spending, big time. Taxing for the biggest part is, I think, a punishment or behavior modification, if you will. And when taxes are higher, people don't spend as much on the goods themselves. It's like us here, we can get the same item for the same price, at Walmart or at the Air Force Base. But if we're at the base we will buy there because there are no taxes. I know you know what I'm saying.
Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:In my experience, the tax *rate* neither encourages nor discourages investment. People may invest to avoid taxes altogether, but they don't typically refuse to invest due to the tax rate. The reason is because if they don't, inflation will eat away at what money they have. So the meme that if we lower taxes it will encourage investment is a myth.
Quoting Xlandria:As for Capital Gains - these taxes, when kept low encourage investments which help fuel our economy. Lower taxes lead to more investments which more than offset those low tax rates.
Not precisely. The equation is slightly more complex than that. There's an inflection point, different for each individual tax payer, at which the revenue from that payer is maximised. Also, investment isn't the only thing good for the economy that is worth encouraging - spending money and earning money also help the cash flow.
In short, you have to look at the whole tax burden, not just income tax. If the top 10% of earners are paying a higher percentage of their income in tax you have to bear in mind that, in compensation, they are also the ones getting most of the benefit from low tax rates on capital gains. Swings and roundabouts. Don't whinge about one bit, while getting fat off the other part on the excuse that it is 'good for all'.
I do agree about cutting spending, though we probably don't agree on where we should cut. ;-)
Sure, when given a choice on whether or not to pay taxes, you will avoid them when it is practical to do so. However, you wouldn't NOT make the purchase because of the taxes.
Quoting Xlandria:
Well, it's not my theory, it's what has been shown to happen in the past. But the main point is, and I'm sure you agree, that we have to cut spending, big time. Taxing for the biggest part is, I think, a punishment or behavior modification, if you will. And when taxes are higher, people don't spend as much on the goods themselves. It's like us here, we can get the same item for the same price, at Walmart or at the Air Force Base. But if we're at the base we will buy there because there are no taxes. I know you know what I'm saying.
Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:
In my experience, the tax *rate* neither encourages nor discourages investment. People may invest to avoid taxes altogether, but they don't typically refuse to invest due to the tax rate. The reason is because if they don't, inflation will eat away at what money they have. So the meme that if we lower taxes it will encourage investment is a myth.
Sorry, Republicans — Nobody’s Getting Impeached
- Xlandria
on Sep. 4, 2012 at 3:07 AM