UI benefits are bad because they aren't "paid for". Tax cuts for the rich are good even though they aren't "paid for".

[Heracles 417]

how about define the wealthy first, as it seems rather nebulous around tax time. pretty much every year amt snares someone in the middle class.

Wealthy is anyone earning or worth [as in assets] over a few million.

The middle class bear the brunt as the poor pay little in tax [for obvious reasons] and the wealthy pay little in tax too, due to tax minimization schemes. Rush, Palin and yourself will turn a blind eye to the latter and claim they deserve it but scold the first group who basically have no means to pay more tax. You guys also don't want a federal sales tax, to close the gap; rather, prefer the wealthy continue with their free ride. Then blame dems and welfare for the country's financial perils and demise.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Booyah!

[Ban Hammer 13,427]

Wealthy is anyone earning or worth [as in assets] over a few million.

The middle class bear the brunt as the poor pay little in tax [for obvious reasons] and the wealthy pay little in tax too, due to tax minimization schemes. Rush, Palin and yourself will turn a blind eye to the latter and claim they deserve it but scold the first group who basically have no means to pay more tax. You guys also don't want a federal sales tax, to close the gap; rather, prefer the wealthy continue with their free ride. Then blame dems and welfare for the country's financial perils and demise.

i see you glossed right over the amt reference. it was designed for the "rich" yet seems to nail the middle class more and more every year.

[Heracles 417]

Edit: If tax was bad, welfare was bad, ensuring people like you [ironically] get to earn a decent wage is so bad for a country, then how the hell are Canadians and Aussies killing it?

It's just amazing how you guys ignore reality of the world and continue down the road based on personal opinions, particularly ones derived from talk-show hosts who earn well into the millions. Common sense suggest these guys are going to attempt to protect the money the receive for talking ###### for a few hours a day; you know, working hard and all. Unlike the walmart worker of course, who is naturally just a bloody slacker that is overspending. Screw his Diabetes or his child's leukemia bill, freagin slacker. Rush on the other hand, he's the epitome of hard work.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Edit: If tax was bad, welfare was bad, ensuring people like you [ironically] get to earn a decent wage is so bad for a country, then how the hell are Canadians and Aussies killing it?

It's just amazing how you guys ignore reality of the world and continue down the road based on personal opinions, particularly ones derived from talk-show hosts who earn well into the millions. Common sense suggest these guys are going to attempt to protect the money the receive for talking ###### for a few hours a day; you know, working hard and all. Unlike the walmart worker of course, who is naturally just a bloody slacker that is overspending. Screw his Diabetes or his child's leukemia bill, freagin slacker. Rush on the other hand, he's the epitome of hard work.

I think people often see things as completely separate independent identities, when in fact within a nation the government, business, and labor are a sort of ecosystem that relies on one another for survival and a good balance should be struck. Everyone's wealth and well being is at least partially reliant on the other identities.

[Heracles 417]

i see you glossed right over the amt reference. it was designed for the "rich" yet seems to nail the middle class more and more every year.

Look at California, it's repubs that are blocking any reasonable tax increases. Same deal federally. Repubs don't want to modernize the tax system and then complain about it. No different to repubs and liberloonyians forcing government workers be paid peanuts, only to turn around and complain about the poor service. Apart form expanding roads, which dems seem to cry about, every economic or infrastructure issue I have in the community around me involves idiotic tea-party representatives blocking something.

The rich look out for themselves, therefore, why should I not look out for myself and others like me or poorer than me? You guys on the other hand scold others that are unfortunate, yet cheer on the mega-wealthy who couldn't give a #### about you. That's beyond bizarre but bloody stupid.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Booyah!

[SMR 368]

Without a government there is no functioning economy.

That's a straw man and I hope you know it. Just because some government is necessary to maintain order in society not all government plans are justified. Most government programs cannot be tied to economic growth or success. If the government would stop redistributing and simply provide the basic services necessary for society to function, I wouldn't be attacking it.

[SMR 368]

Wealthy is anyone earning or worth [as in assets] over a few million.

The middle class bear the brunt as the poor pay little in tax [for obvious reasons] and the wealthy pay little in tax too, due to tax minimization schemes. Rush, Palin and yourself will turn a blind eye to the latter and claim they deserve it but scold the first group who basically have no means to pay more tax. You guys also don't want a federal sales tax, to close the gap; rather, prefer the wealthy continue with their free ride. Then blame dems and welfare for the country's financial perils and demise.

I'd love a federal sales tax. But it needs to replace the income tax, not be in addition to it. As you said, it would close the gap.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

That's a straw man and I hope you know it. Just because some government is necessary to maintain order in society not all government plans are justified. Most government programs cannot be tied to economic growth or success. If the government would stop redistributing and simply provide the basic services necessary for society to function, I wouldn't be attacking it.

A strawman argument requires that I am misrepresenting your position. I have not done this, I merely stated a fact. An economy must have a stable government to thrive. I believe ####### posted a recent thread about the government and fear. Because of fear the economy is not growing at a strong rate.

We probably disagree on exactly how taxes should be collected and spent, but I assume you would agree that every US citizen's wealth has at least some reliance on the US government and therefore there is an important connection between taxes and wealth.

[Heracles 417]

I'd love a federal sales tax. But it needs to replace the income tax, not be in addition to it. As you said, it would close the gap.

I hope you are not referring to the fair tax. What sort of tax approach do you guys think Greece had? Where did it get them again?

We don't complain about taxes in AUS, we simply earn more to offset the tax. Win / win for all as using the tax collected and invested back into the country [economics 101 - use profit to increase dividends] we get a fantastic country and as taxpayer receive a great range of fringe benefits and earn a decent salary to offset the tax. Furthermore, it's extremely hard to propagate cash in the black market there thanks to their VAT/GST.

Therefore you are presented with two different approaches, Fair Tax-esque Greece versus a country that even in this global recession is unstoppable. Yet you guys still prefer Greece's no benefits, no health-care sales-tax oriented taxing approach. The reason you guys don't like GST/VAT is because you didn't invent it and it's European. I watched enough GB to know how Repubs think regarding such things. You'd rather waste time trying to get a square wheel to work than use a round wheel invented by others.

[^_^ 5,021]

[Heracles 417]

A strawman argument requires that I am misrepresenting your position. I have not done this, I merely stated a fact. An economy must have a stable government to thrive. I believe ####### posted a recent thread about the government and fear. Because of fear the economy is not growing at a strong rate.

We probably disagree on exactly how taxes should be collected and spent, but I assume you would agree that every US citizen's wealth has at least some reliance on the US government and therefore there is an important connection between taxes and wealth.

The stats are there for anyone to see, all of the countries with a high Q.O.L and even those with a higher GDP per capita are high taxing period. You will hard pressed to see people there crying murder regarding tax, as most understand how and why tax revenue is necessary for the development and progress of their country. The difference here is that the same people who cry murder about tax, also view the government as the enemy. Furthermore, hate the poor for paying no tax on their pitiful income yet have no problem with the wealthy paying little to no actual tax relative to their income.

The most bizarre thing I have seen here is that the same who people shout Country First, go over the top regarding patriotism and the country being the best yada yada yada, do not want to invest a cent in America or Americans.

[^_^ 5,021]

The most bizarre thing I have seen here is that the same who people shout Country First, go over the top regarding patriotism and the country being the best yada yada yada, do not want to invest a cent in America or Americans.

The American conservative loves America but can't stand Americans.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The American conservative loves America but can't stand Americans.

I know I invest in developing markets. The return is better.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

also in america, the relatively poor like to attack the rich thinking they'll get a slice of the pie from redistribution of the wealth.

Most of us are poor or relatively poor Sir Charles! It just takes a very special kind of imbecile to fight the truly wealthy folks battles IMHO.

Edited July 15, 2010 by ready4ONE

[Ban Hammer 13,427]

Most of us are poor or relatively poor Sir Charles!

you just think you're poor.

It just takes a very special kind of imbecile to fight the truly wealthy folks battles IMHO.

they are called "lawyers"