Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

[unofan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

The question is what gives the gov't the right to more of that person's income? What additional benefit are they getting?

Legally? The U.S. Constitution.
Morally? How about not wanting to bankrupt future generations and living up to that unwritten rule that your kids should be better off than yourself - put another way the whole "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" kind of thing.

As to what benefit they're getting, how about the benefit of living in a society that has the necessary infrastructure and rule of law that allows them make $400,000/year to begin with. That's not exactly a universal right in this world. Frankly, anyone born in this country, or born with the ability to immigrate here, won the lottery at birth, let's not kid ourselves. Unless you'd rather go live in Congo or one of the -Stans or the like.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

The question is what gives the gov't the right to more of that person's income? What additional benefit are they getting?

LOL, that's funny.

 

[ScottM]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

Because a person making $40,000/year spends all or nearly all of it on simply living - food, shelter, clothing, transportation, etc.

A person making $400,000 has money to save and spend on luxuries.

And yet the individual income tax effectively punishes that person for making $400k, whether it's by income, capital gains, royalties, etc., regardless if they have disposable income for a new Bimmer or to send their kids to camp. Meanwhile, the person making $40k still derives benefits from the same government, as well the myriad credits to insulate their home, educate themselves, drop more kids, etc. With an aging, poorer population, the individual income tax will not support those services, unless you want to see brackets well above 50%. Even then, that may not be sustainable without serious means and income thresholds for entitlements, and attendant cuts across the board. And that's just the federal stuff. Factor in state and local taxes and obligations, and the problems with the current tax structure become even more apparent.

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

With an aging, poorer population, the individual income tax will not support those services, unless you want to see brackets well above 50%.

So the Selfish Generation continues to screw us over? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!, at this proposition...

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

So the Selfish Generation continues to screw us over? You don't say...

Color me shocked.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

So the Selfish Generation continues to screw us over? I'm shocked, SHOCKED!, at this proposition...

Well, let's recap.

60's: **** away their parents' tuition payments on sex and drugs.
80's: discover "conservatism" to drive their taxes down at all costs.
00's: countenance torture and pointless warfare out of cowardice.
20's: rediscover "social responsibility" and bankrupt the country with inter-generational payments.

Give them credit: they have been consistently irresponsible for their entire existence. They've just widened the scope of their irresponsibility over time, from family to country to the whole world. Bravo.

One bad thing about the Greatest Generation: they failed miserably at parenting.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

Legally? The U.S. Constitution.
Morally? How about not wanting to bankrupt future generations and living up to that unwritten rule that your kids should be better off than yourself - put another way the whole "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" kind of thing.

As to what benefit they're getting, how about the benefit of living in a society that has the necessary infrastructure and rule of law that allows them make $400,000/year to begin with. That's not exactly a universal right in this world. Frankly, anyone born in this country, or born with the ability to immigrate here, won the lottery at birth, let's not kid ourselves. Unless you'd rather go live in Congo or one of the -Stans or the like.

In this case its the 16th Amendment as the means (that doesn't say that the tax has to be progressive though)

Doesn't the person making $40K have those same resonsibilities and derive the same benefits?

If the person making $40K had the same burden as the person making $400K I think we would finally start to see gov't be forced to get a handle on spending because everyone would take a lot harder look at where their money was spent.

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

In this case its the 16th Amendment as the means (that doesn't say that the tax has to be progressive though)

Doesn't say it shouldn't be progressive, either. And the 16th Amendment by definition is part of the U.S. Constitution, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at point it out after I already said so.

Doesn't the person making $40K have those same resonsibilities and derive the same benefits?

Which they already pay in sales taxes (since they spend pretty much everything they earn, the sales tax hits them harder as a percentage of income), payroll taxes (that nice $75,000 cap on SS taxes is wonderful), excise taxes (gasoline, anyone?) and property taxes (either directly or imputed onto their rent).

Also, there's something to be said for the theory that the guy earning $400k is deriving a greater benefit from the system, and thus should pay more in. And even if he weren't, as a top earner there is some amount of societal obligation to help those less fortunate than himself, morally at least.

If the person making $40K had the same burden as the person making $400K I think we would finally start to see gov't be forced to get a handle on spending because everyone would take a lot harder look at where their money was spent.

If the person who makes $40k had the same burden as a person making $400k, we'd have riots all over the country as people would struggle to keep a roof.

If making 6 figures is so rough, I'm sure there are plenty of people making $50k or less a year that would be willing to trade.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

The question is what gives the gov't the right to more of that person's income? What additional benefit are they getting?

I'm not a knee jerk bleeding heart liberal by any stretch of the imagination but... Seriously?

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

I'm not a knee jerk bleeding heart liberal by any stretch of the imagination but... Seriously?

You might not be a bleeding heart liberal, but he's the worst type of fiscal conservative. One who got through econ 101 but skipped over the whole chapter on "market failures" and the like.

I had some of the biggest free market, pro-capitalism economics professors in the business. One of them regularly goes back-and-forth with Krugman. And yet, none of them adhere to as rigid an ideology like Minnfan does. They still recognize that the real world does not conform to the ideal economic conditions found in textbooks.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

the UP.

I would be shocked if he doesn't get some sort of ambassador / lobbyist gig.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

This is hilarious regarding Fox News coverage of Obama's nuclear arms deal with Russia.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/04/09/taking_on_fox_news.html#034549a

The brainlessness of the conservative comments sorta reminds you of the USCHO cons, no?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

This is hilarious regarding Fox News coverage of Obama's nuclear arms deal with Russia.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/04/09/taking_on_fox_news.html#034549a

The brainlessness of the conservative comments sorta reminds you of the USCHO cons, no?

It becomes more clear every day that in the age of Cable News no one reports what anything actually says, they only report what their mindless automatons want them to hear.

It's a good thing we have Jon Stewart to correct them. Sad, but true.

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

It becomes more clear every day that in the age of Cable News no one reports what anything actually says, they only report what their mindless automatons want them to hear.

It's a good thing we have Jon Stewart to correct them. Sad, but true.

My favorite part (aside from the Hannity-Gingrich = Beavis & Butthead comparison ) is how Obama is advocating the same things as that d@ mn flaming liberal, Ronald Reagan, in regards to nuclear disarmament.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

My favorite part (aside from the Hannity-Gingrich = Beavis & Butthead comparison ) is how Obama is advocating the same things as that d@ mn flaming liberal, Ronald Reagan, in regards to nuclear disarmament.

My favorite part is how Obama is NOT going to retaliate if 1 million Americans are killed in a biological attack. Newt had it wrong, Palin had it wrong, Bachman had it wrong, I saw Pawlenty on that same program and he had it wrong. Hannity had it wrong. O'Reilly had it wrong. Megan Kelly had it wrong. You'd think someone over there at the dtp News Network would know how to read.

In fact Pawlenty said that NOTHING should ever be taken off the table. Sounds to me like nothing has been, so what the hell is he talking about?

 

[Rover]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

In fact Pawlenty said that NOTHING should ever be taken off the table. Sounds to me like nothing has been, so what the hell is he talking about?

Well in fairness I guess this would leave us vulnerable to the ever present threat of an attack from Canada! I just know those crazy Quebecois are secretly developing the Bomb.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

I'm not a knee jerk bleeding heart liberal by any stretch of the imagination but... Seriously?

That this country started out with no income tax at all.

I know that its crazy to believe that people should pay for the services they receive instead of having someone in congress steal it from someone else.

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

Legally? The U.S. Constitution.
Morally? How about not wanting to bankrupt future generations and living up to that unwritten rule that your kids should be better off than yourself - put another way the whole "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" kind of thing.

As to what benefit they're getting, how about the benefit of living in a society that has the necessary infrastructure and rule of law that allows them make $400,000/year to begin with. That's not exactly a universal right in this world. Frankly, anyone born in this country, or born with the ability to immigrate here, won the lottery at birth, let's not kid ourselves. Unless you'd rather go live in Congo or one of the -Stans or the like.

so, only people earning six figure incomes have a moral responsibility to the country?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

That this country started out with no income tax at all.

I know that its crazy to believe that people should pay for the services they receive instead of having someone in congress steal it from someone else.

Taxes is stealing?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.

so, only people earning six figure incomes have a moral responsibility to the country?

Everyone pays taxes. Payroll taxes are taxes and everyone who works pays them. If you don't work maybe you don't pay Federal taxes but you do pay sales taxes to the state and since the state and Federal coffers are the same thing the way they shuffle things around it is dubious to say that ANYONE gets away with paying no taxes.