Biden: Wanna be patriotic? Pay more taxes- Page 2

[kelzama]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 11:39am

Marxist is Marxist, fore or after. Still doesn't work.

Of course, everyone else is taxed. For your grammatical purposes:

So when do you raise the marginal tax rates on everyone else? When's enough enough?

[Unknown User]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 11:45am

SO Kelz I must confess- I'm bewildered. What's Marxist? Taxes? Or progressive taxes? (Where upper income earners pay a higher percentage than lower) You do realize that the top tax bracket is lower now than at any time in the last 70 years, right? The money has been spent- the US must repay the debt that George Bush has accumulated. How do you propose we do that?

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 11:50am

Here's what you're not thinking about: let's say I make $20,000 and I pay 20% of that in tax--that's $5000. That's almost my rent for the year, leaving me with $15,000, which is just enough to cover my expenses but not to save any or buy insurance.

Now say someone makes $500,000 and is taxed at the same rate--he or she pays $100,000-but still makes $400,000 a year--which is more than enough to support anyone in this country comfortably.

People like the capitalist system when it makes them rich, but they aren't willing to pay for the privilege to do business in this country, which in many cases is the ONLY reason the person makes that kind of money in the first place.

Rich areas of NYC have better police, better subway stops, cleaner streets, more commerce...the rich do benefit more. But if their ambulances get there faster, they should be paying for it. If more cops show up to a distress call, they should pay for them. It's not a coincidence that during the blackout the better neighborhoods got service first.

[Jon]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 3:10pm

I make less than $50,000 a year. I am fine with paying the taxes I currently pay.

Let's say I suddenly got a job that paid $500,000 a year. You know what - I would GLADLY pay 50% of that in taxes.

[kelzama]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 3:22pm

Joe:
Biden's statement is patently Marxist.
Take the money [from the rich] and put it in the hands of middle class people

Karl Marx:
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

Lildogs:
What? Of course I thought about that, being that I'm a taxpayer and have been for quite a number of years. What you apparently still haven't thought about is when does the well run dry? The rich are taxed at around 35% federal. The bottom wage earners might be at 10%.

Have you ever looked up which tax payers pay the majority of the tax burden? It might shock you.

Finally, I might be the last one to talk to about blackout power restoration. My neighborhood's going on it's 5th day without power since Ike's remnant winds (80mph+) took out most of Western PA's power. Power restoration was not based on income; rather urgency. Want to be restored first? Live on the same grid as hospitals, fire depts and police stations.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 3:22pm

Why is everyone always crying about the rich? If taxes go up, the rich are going to do just fine, baby. I understand the argument is that the rich shouldn't have to support the less well off in this country, but considering most rich people get (or got) rich taking advantage of others, you would almost consider it their civic duty.

It seems Marxism is perfectly okay when it's employed to keep the rich rich and make them richer (such as bailouts), but when you're just trying to give the rest of the country a fair shake at living decent lives, it becomes a big deal. Say what you want about Marxism but it has a point to make.

Besides, why do you think the economy is crumbling? Because there's too much money going to the top and too little going to the rest. The country has been squeezed dry. I think lildogs made a really excellent point. If you're going to lead an extravagant, privileged lifestyle, you have to pay for it.

[Pippin]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 3:53pm

so my new roomate is a Republican, much to my dismay. We have had a few talks about upcoming election, and what the candidate's stances are. So he tried to explain the stances on the economy and what they plan to do to make things better. Of course he sided with the right. i would expect him to.

this is from his blog, basically what he was trying to explain to me. How much truth does this hold? Are there holes to be punched in this argument, becuase this guy majored in politics and economics, so I can't really hold my own when it comes to a financial argument.

" How to vote with your wallet...and why you should - Part 3: How healthcare and social security are part of economic policy

People have been talking about how the economy, taxes, social security, and healthcare are some of the top issues in this election. I’d like to point out that the economy encompasses all of them. You see, an economic plan must account for most of, or all of the money changing hands in both directions of the market.

Obama would like to centralize the flow from the hands of consumers to the hands of producers. He will do this through taxes. Instead of being able to choose one’s own retirement options and healthcare, he will choose for you. I find this mildly ironic in a nation where we preach anti-trust, anti-monopolistic practices. Competition breeds better pricing and innovation."


The rest can be found here.

[Calvin]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 3:54pm

Kelzama, it's silly to use the Rush Limbaugh pie chart (I call it that because he had it one his Web site for ages) to show how much the rich pay in taxes proportionally.

The top 20 percent or so wealth-wise in this country own about 84 percent of the wealth and the top 1 percent alone have about a third of it.

So, even if you taxed the remainder of the population at an extremely high level and taxed that top 20 percent at a 10 percent rate, that sort of pie chart would make it seem like they're STILL paying way too much in taxes.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:10pm

Reginald, I think you mean "Womb to tomb."

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:17pm

No, I was going for "Cabaret," not "West Side Story."

But either works.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:19pm

Though you're right, of course. If we're refuting the silly notion that Dems--not Republicans--are the ones who want to control you from _____ to ______, we do need to start with the womb, don't we?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:20pm

Pippin, your roommate has that unfortunate habit some people have of often either misstating facts, ignoring them completely, or just plain lying.

"He will cut taxes…but his economic plan calls for the one of the largest tax hikes in the HISTORY of the United states."

Does he mean putting things back to the way they were during the exalted Reagan years? Or during the Clinton years, some of the most prosperous in the HISTORY of the United States?

"I don’t think there is an economist out ther who thinks that increasing the tax burden is a great way to pull an economy out of recession."

Either that, or 60 % of them favor Obama's economic plan.

https://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003850214

Your roommate talks a big game about their health care plans. Tell him to use a google search.
W3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7EaDiaMDCiUT>https://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/28436199.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4OW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7EaDiaMDCiUT

I think it would be incredibly easy for any smart insurance company to take advantage of McCain's plan. Once again Republicans are empowering big business at the expense of the little guy.

It's useless to compare how things are done in Europe to how they are done here (as your roomie does in his blog). Most people from Europe do NOT come here for health care. Most Europeans couldn't afford that and it would be seriously wearing on our own medical system. I'm sure many wealthy Europeans come to Minnesota to go to the Mayo clinic or some such place, but isn't that a whole other story? It's not like they would go to just any hospital. Also the cost of living is different in Europe. People have different concerns about their money and how it's used there. It's just not a useful comparison and it makes your roommate sound like a parrot.

For that matter, ask your roommate WHY we're in a recession right now, if we're supposed to be voting for our wallets. Could it be the 10 million dollars a month war we're waging? Or maybe it's the tax cuts for the wealthiest people in the US in SPITE of a recession and costly war, draining the bank pretty quick. Or maybe the expansion of the deficit. Or maybe a host of other things that the Republicans are responsible for (and yet your roommie still thinks they're better for the economy). He talks about Republicans as if they still acted like Republicans.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:21pm

Well....

You'll never convert him. Just so you know. If I were to have one shot at shattering his talking points I'd say:

You talk about this paradise that will suddenly develop when we just cut taxes...eliminate Social Security...deregulate the markets...

The problem is WE DID THAT. IT DIDN'T WORK. What you (and fellow Republicans) want to do is undo all the Franklin Roosevelt reforms and revert back 1931. You want a Country where the US doesn't administrate your social security and people are free to invest as they please without any "Legislation" to restrict them. That was the case in 1931- and what did it get us? People starved- not figuratively, literally. When you got too old to work, you were SOL. Even if you COULD work, chances are you weren't- or were seriously underemployed. In 1936 FDR said "I see one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished." One Third. Illiteracy was a huge problem with some sources estimating that 7-10% of people over 50 couldn't read or write AT ALL. And do I need to talk about financial difficulties?

And NONE of those problems were solved by decades of Republican "Laissez-faire" economics. They were solved by legislation and government oversight. Social security has transformed what it meant to be elderly in America. The Right wants to turn back the clock to a miserable existence where survival of the fittest isn't a the theme of a Nature Documentary- it's life every day on your street.

you say that eventually that money will "trickle down" through he economy. It has NEVER trickled down before- why will it this time?

[lildogs]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:29pm

"Want to be restored first? Live on the same grid as hospitals, fire depts and police stations."

Like in the rich neighborhoods where all that stuff is...you don't really think response time is the same in all neighborhoods do you?

You really think a 911 call for the Cartier mansion is treated like one from the Popeye's in Bushwick?

"What you apparently still haven't thought about is when does the well run dry? The rich are taxed at around 35% federal. The bottom wage earners might be at 10%."

The well run dry? What well? How about all the corporate tax cheats and all the outstanding debt owed by the wealthy? Check out the link I posted.

And bottom wage earners are not taxed at 10%--try 20%--at least that's how much this bottom tax earner pays.


And what's wrong with each according to his own need? That's the way the college financial aid system works, need-based scholarships, school lunch programs, bus and subway discounts, insurance rates, credit card applications, shall I go on?


Tax Cheats

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 4:30pm

Magical thinking will only get you so far.

Many Republicans are perfectly aware of this though. That whole argument is total bull because they know how to play the system, make their money, and then keep their money and make themselves richer. They get their guys into office so they can make their fat wallets fatter. They talk a good game about trickle down economics and competing to produce the best product but really the point is to control the product and make as much money as you possibly can off of it until people catch on to you.

That's why they are the party of small social issues and distractions rather than the big picture. They know how to control people.

The economy is going to fluctuate no matter who's in power but I think there's something to be said for giving everyone a fair shot. Either way the wealth isn't getting distributed fairly, why not go the route that helps everyone out?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 6:05pm

It is called income redistribution. Take it from those who are successful basically penalizing them & give it to those who are not. It is called Socialism gang

Obama wants to give more tax rebates to those who do not even pay taxes. I have yet to figure out how one gives a tax rebate to someone who does not pay taxes but in the Fantasyland called Washington anything is possible.

The rich will continue to shelter their money because they have the mistaken notion they should be able to keep what they earn. Silly people. The middle class will get hit big time to pay for his gargantuan promises. NY will get hit especially hard & right after the Wall Street mess this will really be the ticket.

[Icehouse Life]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 6:16pm

Borsty is right: We will pay higher taxes all regardless who gets sworn into the White House. What really should be done is perhaps reinstitute the progressive tax system that was dismantled by the Reagan Administration with complicity from Congress as a first step. I don't care if it's Marxist; if it helps to bring the gap between the rich and the poor closer, I'm all for it. Give the poor and working class people a break from the burdens (and I hail from a working class background BTW).

[kelzama]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 6:24pm

lildogs: then you're not a bottom-wage earner. You're not even second to last. According to the IRS charts, no one pays 20%. Once you're above $32,5, you're at 25%; under that, and you're at 15%.

"What's wrong with to each according to need?"

I don't even know where to begin. But I'll try: I need electricity now. How about we cut your supply in half? I need to replace the entire contents of my fridge. How about I take half of yours? I need a new water heater. I'll just pipe water in from yours. I flunked my test; I'll just ask the prof to give me half of your points. You won't mind. After all, I need it.

What's wrong with it is the taking of it. I'd give you the shirt off my back, but I have a real issue with it being taken. I worked hard to earn what I have.

Again, marxism (aka communism) has NEVER worked in a large-scale society.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 6:25pm

Updated On: 1/13/09 at 06:25 PM

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 7:32pm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/oct/31/usnewshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/oct/31/usnews


I should pay more tax, says US billionaire Warren Buffett


The United States' second-richest man has delivered a blunt message to the Bush administration: he wants to pay more tax.

Warren Buffett, the famous investor known as the "Sage of Omaha", has complained that he pays a lower rate of tax than any of his staff - including his receptionist. Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52bn (£25bn), said: "The taxation system has tilted towards the rich and away from the middle class in the last 10 years. It's dramatic; I don't think it's appreciated and I think it should be addressed."

During an interview with NBC television, Mr Buffett brandished an informal survey of 15 of his 18 office staff at his Berkshire Hathaway empire. The billionaire said he was paying 17.7% payroll and income tax, compared with an average in the office of 32.9%.

"There wasn't anyone in the office, from the receptionist up, who paid as low a tax rate and I have no tax planning; I don't have an accountant or use tax shelters. I just follow what the US Congress tells me to do," he said.

Mr Buffett also took a pot shot at hedge fund managers. He said: "Hedge fund operators have spent a record amount lobbying in the last few months - they give money to the political campaigns. Who represents the cleaning lady?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/oct/31/usnewshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/oct/31/usnews

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 7:53pm

Take it from those who are successful basically penalizing them & give it to those who are not.

Yes, those Waltons have never once taken advantage of the less-successful on their road to success. They earned every cent they pried out of the hands of their employees on the poverty line.

[Calvin]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 8:59pm

And I don't know anyone who doesn't pay taxes. Maybe not income tax, but they certainly pay tax every time they purchase goods or services.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/18/08 at 9:36pm

For the folks like Roxy who are fans of W, since this war of BushCheney's is what ran this shaky economy into the ground, how does it feel knowing that you have to have your wealth redistributed into that sinkhole before there can be any hope of economic stability?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 9/19/08 at 1:32am

Who doesn't pay taxes (legally)? I should imagine if someone isn't paying taxes they aren't getting anything back either.

Yeah, and I'm sure every rich person in this country has earned their money entirely legally, without stepping on anyone or taking advantage of anyone or on the backs of anyone else.

[Yawper]

Posted: 9/19/08 at 1:35am

I just want to go back to the tax levels we had in 1979. Would that be Marxist?