Do You Think The Rich Should Be Taxed More?

[evince]

your ideas have about destroyed the republican party silly boy


its bleeding out orange blood

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello and greetings Mason,

Under Socialism we wouldn't have to tax the rich more

We don't have to choose between socialism and capitalism. We can blend the two (as we already have) andseek to choose the best aspects of each, while minimizing the worst.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Quetzalcoatl,

Then the government needs to spend less. Taking more of my money is unacceptable.

That is a quite common sentiment. It voices your concerns for your own well being, but have you considered what is good for the nation?

Whatever the government cuts spending on will affect somebody negatively and hurt the economy to some extent. We don't have to do that if we simply tax the rich more. They can afford it without negatively impacting their lifestyle, since they spend so little of their overall wealth on lifestyle.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello domer76,

Good. Let’s pay much less on the gluttonous military. Let’s pay much less on corporate welfare.

Are you in?

Sounds good to me. We already spend more than the next 7 nations combined. How many times over do we need the capacity to destroy the world?

 

[iolo]

Not more than 99% of their income.

 

[/MSG/]

Hello Quetzalcoatl,



That is a quite common sentiment. It voices your concerns for your own well being, but have you considered what is good for the nation?

Whatever the government cuts spending on will affect somebody negatively and hurt the economy to some extent. We don't have to do that if we simply tax the rich more. They can afford it without negatively impacting their lifestyle, since they spend so little of their overall wealth on lifestyle.

Spoken like someone who has little money to begin with. Increasing the tax burden simply invites incentive to avoid paying anything at all. Hence our current tax code. Additionally, economic meddling is beyond the scope of what governments are created to do (and they are almost universally terrible at it in any case). The SOLE PURPOSE of the State is to safeguard our rights and act as a impartial arbitrator in disputes regarding said rights.

 

[evince]

billy

how much money do you have ?

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello and greetings Mott the Hoople,

(great band)

Yes. For several reasons. One is that progressive taxation is the only fair form of taxation. Mainly because the wealthy, benefit disproportionately from Government program.

Totally agree.

Historically governments have been kleptocracies that taxed the most productive members of society into poverty and redistribute that wealth to the upper classes. Religions primary social purpose has been to rationalize that kleptocracy to the people. With government primarily redistributing productive wealth upwards (despite the political rhetoric) than progressive taxation is the only truly fair form of taxation.

True! As evidenced by growing extreme wealth inequality. The super-rich are in no danger of being 'taxed into poverty,' or having socialism 'cause them to stop working because it isn't worth it any more.'

Secondly for a modern economy to be robust and healthy its currency must be kept in circulation so that it can perform its designed function. The wealthy tend to accumulate wealth then take it out of circulation with the end result the economy of that nation declines and less people have the opportunity to profit. So to keep our monetary system from stagnation higher rates of taxation, on a use it or lose it basis, of those who accumulate vast wealth and take it out of circulation is needed to keep our currency in circulation so it can perform its economic function.

Spot on. Consumerism drives the economy. As wealth inequality becomes greater, consumers have less to spend.

 

[evince]

there are wealthy assed people who agree the wealthy should pay more


only the sociopathic ones want taxes eliminated for them


you do the bidding of your want to be slave masters

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Frank,

Yes...much, much, much more.

In a progressive way.

I think we should be back to a top rate of pre-Ronald Reagan.

70% on the top stuff.

I have actually run calculations using publicly available figures. I calculated that we could adopt a top tax tier of 50%, keep all current spending, and begin paying down the debt.

 

[evince]

then 70% so we can do REAL infrastructure

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello evince,

they do

because they choose to

I had the same thought when Quetzalcoatl posited the idea. But then I thought of the super-rich people I've known and how some of them they also like to save money by being cheap in the strangest ways. Not all rich choose to live in luxury and opulence all the time. For some, part of being rich is being thrifty.

they should pay what everyone else does

For what? Products or taxes?

when they make so much beyond what it takes to live a decent life

Is this part of the previous thought? I'm lost.

they gain the MOST benefit for being an American so they need to pay the MOST taxes to support this nation

Totally true, that part.

It's hard to follow your improper grammar. I don't know where the sentences begin or end. I still suspect you of being a bot. You can convince me you are human by answering my human verification question in the other Topic.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello and greetings Sirthinksalot,

You only mentioned the rich and the poor. Are you envisioning a world without a middle class?

Well, that is where it is ultimately headed.

But as long as we still have one, I'll address that.

The poor can't pay any more, true, but that also includes the lower half of the middle as well as some in the upper half. People tend to spend what they have up till the point that they have everything they want. So even on an upper middle budget, there could be little room for more taxation. Supposed somebody has huge student loans to pay off, and a large mortgage, and becomes impacted with a personal tragedy such as a kid in legal trouble or a draining illness. They could be in a position where a tax hike could cause them to have to sell off the main house or something.

The middle would generally be able to pay more taxes, but if they do, that often comes out of either retirement savings or consumer spending. Both would have a negative effect on the economy. That effect would be largely cumulative because it would involve so many people.

Really, the rich is the only class which can absorb much increased taxation with the least possible negative effect on the economy.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Quetzalcoatl,

Sounds fine. I've long advocated pulling out of NATO.

I disagree. That was set up to prevent another world war.

 

[evince]

everyone who makes that much money from our economy pays those taxes


pretending wealthy people are burdened by higher taxes is stupid

they pay the same everyone else pays until they MAKE MORE than everyone else does



the more you make the more in taxes you pay on that money


perfectly sensible and all other western countries do the same

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello evince,

then 70% so we can do REAL infrastructure

True, but nothing is free. Taxing the rich more will have an impact. Much of what conservatives say is correct. There would be less investment. Markets would be impacted. Anything we do would have to be implemented gradually to lessen the impact. 50% would be a tough sell as it is. 70% would be a non-starter.

We must take all views into consideration.

Any one-sided policy is destined to impart force upon the political pendulum. It is swinging much too wildly as it is. It would be better to reduce the gyrations and get the nation more united.

 

[evince]

Hello evince,



True, but nothing is free. Taxing the rich more will have an impact. Much of what conservatives say is correct. There would be less investment. Markets would be impacted. Anything we do would have to be implemented gradually to lessen the impact. 50% would be a tough sell as it is. 70% would be a non-starter.

We must take all views into consideration.

Any one-sided policy is destined to impart force upon the political pendulum. It is swinging much too wildly as it is. It would be better to reduce the gyrations and get the nation more united.

what was the economy like when we last had taxes this high?


great

 

[evince]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...evenue_as_a_percentage_of_GDP_(1985-2014).png

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello evince,

everyone who makes that much money from our economy pays those taxes


pretending wealthy people are burdened by higher taxes is stupid

Not true. All changes have an impact. It is the degree over which we are arguing.

they pay the same everyone else pays until they MAKE MORE than everyone else does

Misleading. If they make more they pay more. True, they pay the same on the first dollars they earn, up to the break point. It is only the amount over that break point which is taxed at higher rates. It really is a beautiful and fair way of doing it. One could fairly say everybody is taxed under the same rules.



the more you make the more in taxes you pay on that money


perfectly sensible and all other western countries do the same[/QUOTE]

 

[Minister of Truth]

Under Socialism we wouldn't have to tax the rich more

That's because it wouldn't be enough. We would have to hose the middle class (and because the rich would have even more political power).