Please Raise My Taxes

[Damocles]

HAHA. Hoover both raised taxes and cut spending. He had little other choice to keep the government afloat without going into massive debt. The treasury basically forced this on them - deflation went to double digits in the 30's and they still held onto a tight monetary policy. The economy shrunk to such a massive state that the government could barely keep anything up even with massive taxes and huge cuts.

Of course, our treasury is wiser now, so we aren't headed to a great depression, but we still need to spend because we're in a deflationary trap that not even the fed can fix. And raising taxes on the rich just lets us lower taxes on the people who deserve tax cuts even more.

Almost all of the programs that FDR expanded were begun by Hoover. Dano has posted several times the quote of FDR's chief of staff not only admitting it, but stating that most people simply didn't realize this fact.

I find the Great Depression interesting, and amazingly valid at this point in time.

Taxing the "highest earners" at a higher level would not be beneficial to us at this time, and it will never be beneficial to take from them so heavily that it reduces incentive to succeed.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Yes. I agree, arguing with a wall would be more effective than convincing people that punishing success is "smart".

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Almost all of the programs that FDR expanded were begun by Hoover.

Yeah, like the RTC, and the Hoover Dam, and the RTC, and the Hoover Dam, and the RTC, and the Hoover Dam, and t he RTC, and the HOover Dam. Can't really think of any other parts of the New Deal, myself, those Hoover programs were so many.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Taxing the "highest earners" at a higher level would not be beneficial to us at this time, and it will never be beneficial to take from them so heavily that it reduces incentive to succeed.

You are honestly trying to tell me that making 25 billion instead of 33 billion reduces the "incentive to succeed" by any sort of recognizable amount?

And of course, taxing money to spend it wouldn't be effective. Which is why I'm saying that we should make the tax raise revenue neutral, and finance the stimulus on deficit until the economy stabilizes.

 

[Damocles]

You are honestly trying to tell me that making 25 billion instead of 33 billion reduces the "incentive to succeed" by any sort of recognizable amount?

And of course, taxing money to spend it wouldn't be effective. Which is why I'm saying that we should make the tax raise revenue neutral, and finance the stimulus on deficit until the economy stabilizes.

I don't know of one CEO making 25 Billion in salary, Watermark. That's weak even for you.

Personally, if I were a shareholder of companies that overpay CEOs without recognizing those at the bottom I would vote to create a new board. It is silly to overpay these guys to such a level anyway.

I've let myself get away from the original article. The "CEO's should pay more in taxes so we can 'celebrate that half their money will go to..'" argument that is so silly to begin with.

CEOs are overpaid. He feels guilty. But suggesting that because he does we should "take advantage of it" and "tax it more" rather than work on the environment where they get paid too much to begin with...

He's trying to justify making too much money because the government will "take half" to be used for <insert whatever here>. It's a silly justification, that deserves the silly response. "If you feel you pay too little, write a bigger check."

 

[a11n]

The broad mass of a nation will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I don't know of one CEO making 25 Billion in salary, Watermark. That's weak even for you.

Personally, if I were a shareholder of companies that overpay CEOs without recognizing those at the bottom I would vote to create a new board. It is silly to overpay these guys to such a level anyway.

I've let myself get away from the original article. The "CEO's should pay more in taxes so we can 'celebrate that half their money will go to..' argument that is so silly to begin with."

CEOs are overpaid. He feels guilty. But suggesting that because he does we should "take advantage of it" and "tax it more" rather than work on the environment where they get paid too much to begin with...

Whatever.

 

[meme]

I still think if the idiot in the article feels guilty that he makes too much money, he should donate his HUGE salary to the government..like a good little Socialist would.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Yes, I reject his opinion, but I do it based on a bit of learning from history. It was already tried. Punishing the wealthy for being successful is not a solution that will stimulate the economy. In fact it will work quite the opposite.

And my solution forces nobody to live as I live. It even allows him to feel good for giving what he feels would be the right amount to the government. I prefer to donate cash to non-profits.

It's really just making corrupt ceo's (all of the big companies, being big means paying the government legislators to give you contracts, and then give them kickback) pay a corruption tax.

 

[uscitizen]

Feds raising cig taxes by .61, looks like KY adding .50 to that.
I think I will give myself a tax cut and quit smoking.

One question why only on cigs and not other tobacco products?