Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

I have yet to see a nation create wealth for everyone while at the same time collect zero taxes. It's never been done.

Hmm.....let's see, Ben Franklin established a very successful printing business, invented bi-focals and the Franklin stove, Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin, Robert Fulton invented the steamboat, and tax revenues as a percentage of GDP was under 5%.

So "zero" hasn't been done, but the early US came very close.

I'm not as familiar with taxation under Henry VIII in England; not sure if the concept that his confiscation of Church property led to the capital formation that started the Industrial Revolution is still in favor or not, they also came pretty close.

One thing for sure. No government ever has "created" wealth, they have at best facilitated conditions under which wealth creation could occur, the most important of which is rule of law and enforcement of contracts.

We don't have as much of that these days, instead the parties vie to see which one can shower the most government benefits on favored constituencies. (811 waivers in the first year of Obama'care', yeah, rule of law is really important).

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

That's exactly what he said.

oh?

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.

I guess he was speaking in super-secret code and you are one of the fortunate few who have a decoder ring?

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

I have never understood this line of reasoning. It's like saying libraries shouldn't have late fines because then people will be less likely to return overdue books. The solution to tax evasion isn't lowering taxes, it's prosecuting tax evasion.

When people look at Romney's returns, they're not going to say "Holy Balls! I can't believe that the marginal rate tops out at x%. Imagine the revenue enhancement we'd realize if Romney and his ilk had another step or two."

They're going to say "Romney had a year in which his effective tax rate was 4%?!? How the flying effballs is that possible?"

I'm completely setting aside the question whether the top marginal rate is ok as it stands. My point is that it would be a non sequitur to complain about that top rate and hold up Romney as exhibit A. The crack about evasion was incidental to the main point, which is that Romney doesn't pay 34% (or whatever the rate is) in the first place.

edit:

Evasion was a poor choice of words, because I'm including legal means of lowering one's tax burden. Anyway -- your last sentence says it all, more efficiently than I did. Raising the top rate is not a solution for tax evasion (legal or otherwise).

 

[MUnRPI]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

I have never understood this line of reasoning. It's like saying libraries shouldn't have late fines because then people will be less likely to return overdue books.

The solution to tax evasion isn't lowering taxes, it's prosecuting tax evasion.

The problem is that the code is so long and archaic and there is too much grey area. There are so many ways to classify / 'hide' income and that prosecuting tax evasion becomes too difficult and costly.

I'm a firm believer that if you can't explain a law to a 5th grader, then it's not a good law.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

oh?



I guess he was speaking in super-secret code and you are one of the fortunate few who have a decoder ring?

Or the farking point is the last line of that paragraph you quoted and you're being deliberately obtuse. No, you wouldn't do that.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

I guess he was speaking in super-secret code and you are one of the fortunate few who have a decoder ring?

When you create the next Apple in Zimbabwe using their infrastructure and the people that live there as your employees come back and talk to me. Otherwise you're acting like Hannity and it's boring.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

The problem is that the code is so long and archaic and there is too much grey area. There are so many ways to classify / 'hide' income and that prosecuting tax evasion becomes too difficult and costly.

I'm a firm believer that if you can't explain a law to a 5th grader, then it's not a good law.

Depends on the 5th grader.

But I take your point. I'm a firm believer that the tax code, like programming code, should be continually subject to configuration control, optimization, and clean up. I assume the reason it isn't is that confusion and exceptions are tax lawyers' job security and wealthy clients' escape hatches.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

When people look at Romney's returns, they're not going to say "Holy Balls! I can't believe that the marginal rate tops out at x%. Imagine the revenue enhancement we'd realize if Romney and his ilk had another step or two."

They're going to say "Romney had a year in which his effective tax rate was 4%?!? How the flying effballs is that possible?"

I'm completely setting aside the question whether the top marginal rate is ok as it stands. My point is that it would be a non sequitur to complain about that top rate and hold up Romney as exhibit A. The crack about evasion was incidental to the main point, which is that Romney doesn't pay 34% (or whatever the rate is) in the first place.

edit:

Evasion was a poor choice of words, because I'm including legal means of lowering one's tax burden. Anyway -- your last sentence says it all, more efficiently than I did. Raising the top rate is not a solution for tax evasion (legal or otherwise).

Actually, you have the seeds of a great idea here!

Romney should speak out forcefully for the need for tax reform, and use his tax returns as an exhibit why it is needed! Then, instead of apologizing, he can say, "look, the law is screwed up, don't castigate me, vote for the kind of Congress that can fix these messed-up laws!"

In other words, he should use it as an opportunity to go on offense and hammer home a key campaign point: high tax rates are a covert invitation to corruption, the well-connected never actually pay those rates, they always find a willing Congressional representative who'll slip in some kind of special exemption, and that's unfair to the rest of us. Rid the personal income tax code of all deductions exemptions and credits, and you won't see this kind of nonsense any more!

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

'm a firm believer that the tax code, like programming code, should be continually subject to configuration control, optimization, and clean up. I assume the reason it isn't is that confusion and exceptions are tax lawyers' job security and wealthy clients' escape hatches.

and a continued source of campaign contributions for folks like Chuck Shumer who talk one game while playing a different one (he's one of the biggest defender of carried interest for hedge fund managers because hedge fund managers and their ilk pay about half of the New York state income taxes, and he doesn't want them leaving). There are way too many politicians who say "increase tax rates on the wealthy" while at the same time they are plotting with the lobbyists for the wealthy on how to insert special-interest exemptions.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

You seem really hung up on this, like Romney.

Shame on you for linking me with him.

Make the case for not doing the bank bailout then. If you can make that case then I will agree with you that GM/Chrysler should have been cut loose.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/18/us-economy-bank-bailout

Oh and as for the tax code Kepler, the solution is out there and has been for quite some time - it was offered up by one of (maybe both?) of the deficit/debt reduction commissions. Just scrap the deductions/credits and lower the rates (I can't recall if their plan raised capital gains rates or not).

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Or the farking point is the last line of that paragraph you quoted and you're being deliberately obtuse. No, you wouldn't do that.

Actually, I'm an undercover Democratic campaign operative and I'm trying to generate support for Obama by distorting his record to such an extent that people will be outraged at the distortions and rally to his defense.

Seems to be working perfectly so far, eh?

 

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

and a continued source of campaign contributions for folks like Chuck Shumer who talk one game while playing a different one (he's one of the biggest defender of carried interest for hedge fund managers because hedge fund managers and their ilk pay about half of the New York state income taxes, and he doesn't want them leaving). There are way too many politicians who say "increase tax rates on the wealthy" while at the same time they are plotting with the lobbyists for the wealthy on how to insert special-interest exemptions.

It's amazing that you're a liberal and yet whenever you mention a Democrat you seem to disparage them, and whenever you feel the need to point out the evil things politicians do you always seem to mention Democrats. I'm sure it's just a coincidence because you're such an open-minded liberal. Just out of curiosity, when is the last time a liberal had an idea you thought was a good idea? Health care? Nope. Tax policy? Nope. Immigration? Foreign policy? Gay marriage? Pro-Choice? How exactly are you a liberal when you don't support any of the policies we support?

 

[pirate]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

and a continued source of campaign contributions for folks like Chuck Shumer who talk one game while playing a different one (he's one of the biggest defender of carried interest for hedge fund managers because hedge fund managers and their ilk pay about half of the New York state income taxes, and he doesn't want them leaving). There are way too many politicians who say "increase tax rates on the wealthy" while at the same time they are plotting with the lobbyists for the wealthy on how to insert special-interest exemptions.

Maybe NY should incent them to move to other countries...tell them NY will give them a tax break if they leave and since they will do anything for a tax break, they go...but the joke's on them, since they never paid taxes NY isn't really giving them a break! So, NY gets rid of them all, there is no loss of tax revenue nor jobs because they don't pay taxes, they don't employ anybody and lord knows they never worked hard to make that money anyway.

NY benefits by getting rid of these freeloaders, no NY programs are harmed because people paying no taxes can't be helping fund social programs and no other companies or individuals are impacted because these types of people don't drive any economic activity outside of their own bank account. A big win.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

It's amazing that you're a liberal and yet whenever you mention a Democrat you seem to disparage them

there are very few liberals left in the Democratic party these days, they've all either retired or been expelled for not adhering to the appropriate orthodoxies. Bill Clinton today would be too right-wing to have much influence in today's party...notice how he's been muzzled since the last time he spoke, when he had the temerity actually to say something sensible? JFK might actually fit better in today's "moderate Republican" (a/k/a RINO) camp!

though I suppose I'm just being old-fashioned, since my understanding of "liberal" is based on the intellectual tradition of Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, and Martin Luther King, Jr. of individual liberty and (mostly) free markets (with appropriate adjustments for "free riders" and the "problem of the commons"). Clinton's greatest accomplishments were NAFTA and welfare reform, straight up the middle for a liberal.

perhaps I'm just like any other jilted spouse? the party I once loved tossed me aside for someone else. Democrats today don't care much about individual liberty, they are all about government compulsion instead. They don't care about free markets any longer, everything has to be regulated.

Of course I disparage Democrats for betraying what used to be their core principles. why would that surprise you? As J.R. Houseman used to say, "they earned it."

Conservatives feel the same way about today's Republican party: Republicans support way too much crony capitalism for any conservative to be comfortable with them, either.

I'm bereft, alone in the center, as each party engages in a race to see which can become more extreme, the "progressives" on the left, or the radicals on the right.

There aren't many candidates around who merit support either from conservatives or from liberals. that's a key reason why party affiliation has been declining, and "independents" have been increasing in number. The professional politician has taken over in both parties, and operates a continuous fund-raising campaign in a few key core constituencies. If you aren't an extremist, you don't agitate, and you don't donate, and so neither party has any use for you!

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Hmm.....let's see, Ben Franklin established a very successful printing business, invented bi-focals and the Franklin stove, Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin, Robert Fulton invented the steamboat

They didn't do that.

Sorry, couldn't help the recent meme.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Maybe NY should incent them to move to other countries...tell them NY will give them a tax break if they leave and since they will do anything for a tax break, they go...but the joke's on them, since they never paid taxes NY isn't really giving them a break! So, NY gets rid of them all, there is no loss of tax revenue nor jobs because they don't pay taxes, they don't employ anybody and lord knows they never worked hard to make that money anyway.

NY benefits by getting rid of these freeloaders, no NY programs are harmed because people paying no taxes can't be helping fund social programs and no other companies or individuals are impacted because these types of people don't drive any economic activity outside of their own bank account. A big win.

You already get an incentive to leave NYS in the form of tax breaks.

 

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

there are very few liberals left in the Democratic party these days, they've all either retired or been expelled for not adhering to the appropriate orthodoxies. Bill Clinton today would be too right-wing to have much influence in today's party...notice how he's been muzzled since the last time he spoke, when he had the temerity actually to say something sensible? JFK might actually fit better in today's "moderate Republican" (a/k/a RINO) camp!

though I suppose I'm just being old-fashioned, since my understanding of "liberal" is based on the intellectual tradition of Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, and Martin Luther King, Jr. of individual liberty and (mostly) free markets (with appropriate adjustments for "free riders" and the "problem of the commons"). Clinton's greatest accomplishments were NAFTA and welfare reform, straight up the middle for a liberal.

perhaps I'm just like any other jilted spouse? the party I once loved tossed me aside for someone else. Democrats today don't care much about individual liberty, they are all about government compulsion instead. They don't care about free markets any longer, everything has to be regulated.

Of course I disparage Democrats for betraying what used to be their core principles. why would that surprise you? As J.R. Houseman used to say, "they earned it."

Conservatives feel the same way about today's Republican party: Republicans support way too much crony capitalism for any conservative to be comfortable with them, either.

I'm bereft, alone in the center, as each party engages in a race to see which can become more extreme, the "progressives" on the left, or the radicals on the right.

There aren't many candidates around who merit support either from conservatives or from liberals. that's a key reason why party affiliation has been declining, and "independents" have been increasing in number. The professional politician has taken over in both parties, and operates a continuous fund-raising campaign in a few key core constituencies. If you aren't an extremist, you don't agitate, and you don't donate, and so neither party has any use for you!

Oh woe is you...all alone in the center.

On the bright side, at least you can stop the charade of pretending to be a liberal.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

at least [the Democratic party] can stop the charade of pretending [it still cares about] liberal [values].

Fixed your post

 

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Fixed your post

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

there are very few liberals left in the Democratic party these days, they've all either retired or been expelled for not adhering to the appropriate orthodoxies. Bill Clinton today would be too right-wing to have much influence in today's party...notice how he's been muzzled since the last time he spoke, when he had the temerity actually to say something sensible? JFK might actually fit better in today's "moderate Republican" (a/k/a RINO) camp!

Any fact based evidence of this whatsoever?