Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   Under Ryan's budget plan, Romney would have paid 0.82% in taxes on 8 figure income. That's not a typo   (theatlantic.com) divider line 310
    More: Scary, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

5000 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Aug 2012 at 6:47 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



310 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-12 11:12:49 AM  

Kibbler: Yankees Team Gynecologist: Bloody William: badhatharry: I'm not sure why I bother but...

CAPITAL GAINS IS NOT INCOME!

It is taxed at a lower rate to encourage investment in the economy.

How's that been working out? For that matter, how have the job creators like Romney been creating jobs in response to the lowest tax rates in 50 years?



Mitt Romney saying he knows how to create jobs is like Dan Snyder saying he knows how to create wins. No, you know how to make money for yourself. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's not the same thing at all.

Capital gains rates are low because the wealthier you are, the more of your income comes from capital gains rates, and the rates are set by the wealthy or their tools. Want to see the economy crater? Raise taxes on the lower and low-middle class. Watch consumer spending vanish.

Cart, horse, which goes in front?


And this is exactly what Ryan's budget would do, in addition to instituting austerity measures that would virtually guarantee a depression.
 
2012-08-12 11:23:39 AM  
I so love the "Half of American's don't Pay Taxes" claim.

All the while never recognizing that just 6 people in America (the heirs of Sam Walton of WalMart fame) have total net worth which exceeds that of 50 MILLION FAMILIES COMBINED!!!

And in terms of wealth, the Walton clan only manages to take spots #6, 9, 10, 103, 104 in terms of richest Americans.

I haven't crunched the numbers, but it's quite likely that the top 20-30 richest Americans have a combined net worth valued at more than at least 200,000 Million Americans combined. Take the top 200 or so, and they have to be closing in on having more net wealth more than all of the remaining Americans combined.

With that kind of wealth disparity, my question is: Does the amount paid by the super wealthy actually fairly represent their piece of the pie? (And as has been pointed out numerous times, the other taxes paid by that 50% who supposedly pay no income tax, do provide a significant amount of tax revenue, especially on the state and local levels.
 
2012-08-12 11:27:29 AM  
i64.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-12 11:28:14 AM  
Want the bottom half to pay more taxes? Pay them higher wages.
 
2012-08-12 11:37:47 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-12 11:38:42 AM  
i47.tinypic.com

Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?" It isn't the GDP that needs to grow - it's per capita income. The only jobs being created by the 1% these days are a handful of extra investment bankers at financial firms. If per capita income rises in consumer-based economy, demand for new workers appears in every sector of the economy.

How has the conservative base managed to kill that train of thought? Why are we listening to business moguls instead of professional economists (most of which could care less about either political party)?
 
2012-08-12 11:41:23 AM  

clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?" It isn't the GDP that needs to grow - it's per capita median income. The only jobs being created by the 1% these days are a handful of extra investment bankers at financial firms. If per capita median income rises in consumer-based economy, demand for new workers appears in every sector of the economy.


FTFM
 
2012-08-12 11:42:53 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-08-12 11:42:59 AM  
Say, didn't Romney say he WANTED to focus on policy?

It appears Obama is obliging him! How magnanimous. =3
 
2012-08-12 11:44:47 AM  

clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?"


I already covered that upthread - it allows business access to capital in exchange for equity instead of debt, so they can expand more cheaply. The "other financial instruments" bit becomes more murky, as you start getting into trading risk instead of investing in equity. As for the rest of your post, yes... the conservative party has gone off the rails, pants-on-head retarded with their approach to economic policy.
 
2012-08-12 11:50:21 AM  

Bloody William: Do you want to know what class warfare is? Class warfare is Contra.

You have one group of people who know the Konami code. They use it at the beginning of the game to get 30 lives. They often beat the game because they have so many chances to keep going. If they fail a few times, they have plenty of resources to keep fighting the boss and reach the next level.

You have another group of people who don't have the Konami code. Or, worse yet, they get punished for entering the Konami code. They get 3 lives and can't continue. If they screw up a few times, they're done. They can't go back. They can't keep going. Very good or lucky players can beat the game with those 3 lives, but the vast majority of both the people in this group and the people in the group who get 30 lives can't. They are the exception.

The people in the former group say that Contra is easy because they can get far and often beat the game, and they point at the few people in the latter group who manage to do it too as proof. That doesn't make Contra actually easy. it only means that one group of people get a great opportunity and tons of extra lives, and a few members of the other group of people are skilled and lucky enough to get as far.


That's actually a beautiful analogy.

Kudos.
 
2012-08-12 11:51:38 AM  

badhatharry: I'm not sure why I bother but...

CAPITAL GAINS IS NOT INCOME!

It is taxed at a lower rate to encourage investment in the economy.


Yeah, because nobody invested in the economy before we lowered the rate to 15%.
 
2012-08-12 11:51:42 AM  

Hobodeluxe: jetzzfan: That's still more than the 49.5% of people that don't pay income taxes

Link

citing the Heritage foundation as a source automatically disqualifies your post


Sometimes I wonder if people who post AEI, Heritage, von Mises Institute, or other right-wing think tanks' links actually agree with the points being made. Considering the sheer amount of bullshiat in those links and the utter ease with which it's debunked, I wonder if these people are just liberals and moderates who are too lazy to do the legwork themselves and instead just set the volleyball for others to spike.
 
2012-08-12 11:59:06 AM  
Sometimes I wonder if people who post AEI, Heritage, von Mises Institute, or other right-wing think tanks' links actually agree with the points being made. Considering the sheer amount of bullshiat in those links and the utter ease with which it's debunked, I wonder if these people are just liberals and moderates who are too lazy to do the legwork themselves and instead just set the volleyball for others to spike.

I hope not. For every intelligent person who can see through those think tanks' BS, there's at least one moron who takes it as gospel.
 
2012-08-12 12:00:06 PM  

DamnYankees: Man, thank of all the jobs he could create!


the only jobs he'd be creating are blow jobs from his 4 19 year old girlfriends that don't exist.
 
2012-08-12 12:01:50 PM  

ignite ice: Nothing is stopping you from investing your money into the stock market and taking the same route as Mitt Romney. Paul Ryan's plan benefits all stock investors, and it makes sense why we should do that: it incentives the working class to put their savings into the stock market instead of the failing banks. That eight figure income is Romney's income and it has little do with Ryan's tax proposal. Romney is a bystander. He benefits just like you would. Romney gave over 15% of his income in 2010 to charity and the bible states that when you give your money away, it will come back to you in even greater amounts.



so what about a failing stock market??
 
2012-08-12 12:03:21 PM  

Neeek: shotglasss: But they're not paying Federal income taxes. State income tax, sales tax, property taxes where applicable...none of those are helping pay down the trillions in debt we have. Perhaps if we set a bottom of 1% Federal income tax that everyone must pay, we could get more people to have Skin In The Game - A Joe Biden demand.

Or we could change the Capital gains rate from 15% max to 50% across the board, which unearned income should be, and solve the whole problem.


BUT RICH PEOPLE WILL STOP TRYING TO MAKE FREE MONEY STOLEN FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY WORK IF WE TAX IT MORE!1
 
2012-08-12 12:03:35 PM  

Mugato: ignite ice: Nothing is stopping you from investing your money into the stock market and taking the same route as Mitt Romney

So go be born a millionaire? It may be too late for that.



the name of the game is inherited wealth now. course, there will always be a connected few who do it on their own, but the spigot is being slowly turned off for everyone else.

isn't Freedom great!
 
2012-08-12 12:05:02 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: And every one of these jackasses would get a tax hike. But the dipshiats will still vote Republican.


[blogs.ajc.com image 850x571]



cause they watch alot of Big Business owned TV (boob toob) and talk radio. the only real news left is online because our big business buddies haven't figured out a way to own/control it.....yet.
 
2012-08-12 12:07:31 PM  

AkaDad: badhatharry: I'm not sure why I bother but...

CAPITAL GAINS IS NOT INCOME!

It is taxed at a lower rate to encourage investment in the economy.

Yeah, because nobody invested in the economy before we lowered the rate to 15%.



and back when ronnie raygun was president and the upper tax rate was in the 50's, rich folks were broke. just dead poor.

thank the good lord they've been rescued from that horrible ronnie raygun.
 
2012-08-12 12:08:03 PM  
lh3.googleusercontent.com
 
2012-08-12 12:09:13 PM  

clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?" It isn't the GDP that needs to grow - it's per capita income. The only jobs being created by the 1% these days are a handful of extra investment bankers at financial firms. If per capita income rises in consumer-based economy, demand for new workers appears in every sector of the economy.


The idea that investment in stocks is inherently not beneficial to the economy is just as bad as the idea that cutting taxes solves anything and everything or that banks are useless.
Stock markets and banks are essential to a modern economy. They provide for the flow of capital between those who have money and don't need at the moment and those who need money.
Now there are issues and some transactions that have minimal, if any, benefit for the economy or present costs that may exceed benefits. The aforementioned high-frequency transactions are one issue in the market. A bigger issue is a lot of speculative investments where money is put into assets that are not used in business and can drive up prices of the asset and harm the economy. At the same time, these types of transactions are essential to businesses for hedging and reducing risks.

It is a very complicated to determine whether a transaction is beneficial because almost all types of transactions are beneficial if used under the right circumstances and in moderation. As such, it is nearly impossible to separate wanted and unwanted transactions and impose restrictions.
 
2012-08-12 12:10:27 PM  
Wow, you just have to love the talking point "Half of all americans earn so little they don't pay any income tax. So its okay that rich people have lots of ways to avoid paying large amounts of the tax they should be paying"

Here is a hint - people with lots of money have all the resources they need to take care of themselves, the vast majority of the population should worry about themselves, not those poor little ultra rich people.
 
2012-08-12 12:16:50 PM  

Linux_Yes: AkaDad: badhatharry: I'm not sure why I bother but...

CAPITAL GAINS IS NOT INCOME!

It is taxed at a lower rate to encourage investment in the economy.

Yeah, because nobody invested in the economy before we lowered the rate to 15%.


and back when ronnie raygun was president and the upper tax rate was in the 50's, rich folks were broke. just dead poor.

thank the good lord they've been rescued from that horrible ronnie raygun.


The tax rate probably was higher than it should be when Reagan took office.
There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.

Obviously the before and after effects of the Bush II fiasco suggest that the tax rate should be higher than it is now for the most advantaged but those effects don't prove that tax rates should be at the level they were in the '70s
 
2012-08-12 12:18:56 PM  

incendi: clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?"

I already covered that upthread - it allows business access to capital in exchange for equity instead of debt, so they can expand more cheaply. The "other financial instruments" bit becomes more murky, as you start getting into trading risk instead of investing in equity. As for the rest of your post, yes... the conservative party has gone off the rails, pants-on-head retarded with their approach to economic policy.


Um, if I buy 100 shares of GM stock, exactly $0 goes back to GM. The money goes to whoever is selling the stock. That transaction does nothing to the economy, besides whatever taxes (if any) the guy selling it has to pay.
 
2012-08-12 12:23:53 PM  

ignite ice: Nothing is stopping you from investing your money into the stock market and taking the same route as Mitt Romney. Paul Ryan's plan benefits all stock investors, and it makes sense why we should do that: it incentives the working class to put their savings into the stock market instead of the failing banks. That eight figure income is Romney's income and it has little do with Ryan's tax proposal. Romney is a bystander. He benefits just like you would. Romney gave over 15% of his income in 2010 to charity and the bible states that when you give your money away, it will come back to you in even greater amounts.


Especially when its to political campaigns.
 
2012-08-12 12:25:44 PM  

AnEvilGuest: Linux_Yes: AkaDad: badhatharry: I'm not sure why I bother but...

CAPITAL GAINS IS NOT INCOME!

It is taxed at a lower rate to encourage investment in the economy.

Yeah, because nobody invested in the economy before we lowered the rate to 15%.


and back when ronnie raygun was president and the upper tax rate was in the 50's, rich folks were broke. just dead poor.

thank the good lord they've been rescued from that horrible ronnie raygun.

The tax rate probably was higher than it should be when Reagan took office.
There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.


Yeah, there's "something" to be said for it. It's a pragmatic argument. Trouble is, it's coming from the same people who want to lower taxes on the wealthy, and raise them on the poor, out of a sense of "fairness", and a desire that everyone have "skin in the game", as a matter of "principle".
Well, make up your f**king minds.
Are we operating on principle? Because if we are, then "fairness" dictates that capital gains be taxed like any other earning, without regard to whether it "stimulates investment"..
If, on the other hand, we are acting on pragmatics, what the f**k is the sense in taxing people who have no money, and spend what little they do have in the already ailing consumer economy (instead of shifting it to offshore banks)?
Which is it to be?
Or do you believe you can invoke pragmatics when it is convenient to you, and principle when that is?
 
2012-08-12 12:28:44 PM  

Weaver95: oh, and not to mention the fact that the Ryan announcement was ill timed all around and looked rather shabby to boot.



What are you talking about? P. Davis Ryan is going to be the next President of the United States! Romney even said so.
 
2012-08-12 12:29:47 PM  

AnEvilGuest: There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.


You do know that reinvestments into your own company don't count toward your tax liability, right?
 
2012-08-12 12:30:09 PM  

xria: Wow, you just have to love the talking point "Half of all americans earn so little they don't pay any income tax. So its okay that rich people have lots of ways to avoid paying large amounts of the tax they should be paying"

Here is a hint - people with lots of money have all the resources they need to take care of themselves, the vast majority of the population should worry about themselves, not those poor little ultra rich people.


Bullshiat! If we just squeeze harder, we can TOTALLY get blood from this stone!
 
2012-08-12 12:34:10 PM  

AnEvilGuest: There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.


There's also something to be said for considering your capital gains income to be the same as the profits from your business, but I think it's that you're a turd. If your perspective is that you have to rely on those gains to such extremity that their taxation rate will seriously impact you, then your problem is probably further up the chain in your actual business practice. No shiat "more money is even better for you and the people you effect directly", that's not what we're discussing. We're discussing the net social benefit of adjusting these parameters, not your localized personal problem, and you need to extract the two if you want to be taken seriously.

Ignoring that, it also means that on a fundamental level, you are not facing the same kinds of problems as the majority of Americans. You are, in fact, experiencing "white people problems" and you should be very aware of that.
 
2012-08-12 12:36:52 PM  
"Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends."

And there it is boys and girls, that's how the rich will keep getting richer while the rest of us pay more in taxes in order to make up the difference. But go ahead Red State patriots, keep voting for the very people who want to keep you in the poor house while they add car elevators to their mansions.
 
2012-08-12 12:37:24 PM  

PanicMan: Um, if I buy 100 shares of GM stock, exactly $0 goes back to GM. The money goes to whoever is selling the stock. That transaction does nothing to the economy, besides whatever taxes (if any) the guy selling it has to pay.


Sure, if you choose to look at the problem from an incredibly narrow and shortsighted point of view, it's just two people exchanging a little electronic number saying I own 1/1570000000th of GM for money. But rather than type it all out again, I'll just quote my previous post:

incendi: Well, sort of. The market provides an important function, providing a source of working capital in exchange for equity. This makes it much easier for companies to expand quickly as opposed to issuing debt or simply working within the constraints of their current cash flow, and is good for the economy. The trading after initial issuance of the equity allows the first big-money investors to regroup and invest in other things. So, when you buy your hundred-year old share of proctor and gamble or whatever, you can say that yes, you didn't actually contribute shiat to P&G, and neither did the last 50 people who held that particular share, but you freed someone else's capital to invest in something else. The net effect is that the market as a whole has the capacity to gracefully absorb new issuances, providing capital to companies willing to exchange equity for it.

 
2012-08-12 12:39:02 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: AnEvilGuest: There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.

You do know that reinvestments into your own company don't count toward your tax liability, right?


Oh no, I'm sure if Obama is elected a second term he'll get rid of that because he just hates small business so much.
 
2012-08-12 12:40:46 PM  

Alphax: thenewmissus: Lenny_da_Hog: Romney replied, "From now on, I want to make it clear, my friends, that policy and position discussions should be off the table during this campaign, and we've contacted the Obama camp to demand this."

Did Romney really say this? Cuz that would be the stupidest thing ever. Discussing the issues is what politics is all about. Wow.........just....wow!

I think that was a joke.. but he does act like that.


That such hyperbole seems plausible is telling....
 
2012-08-12 12:45:11 PM  

KilaKitu: The 0.82% number is a powerful statement that people can latch onto, and one that the GOP will fight tooth and nail as misleading, but I'd bet it's already incorporated into the stump speech for O/B. I can't figure out how Romney responds to that - - it's pretty damming and again brings his personal taxes to the front of the discussion, which is exactly where the Dems want it. Surely someone in Rmoney's campaign saw this coming...if not, then that's even a worse indictment on their incompetence.


We're talking about a guy who's been planning to run for President for like a decade, planned to only release that one year of taxes, STILL had to redact a lot of information from it, but STILL had the balls to leave in the fact that he's claiming a dancing horse (and 77 thousand for its food) as a medical deduction for his wife.
 
2012-08-12 12:45:48 PM  

dywed88: clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?" It isn't the GDP that needs to grow - it's per capita income. The only jobs being created by the 1% these days are a handful of extra investment bankers at financial firms. If per capita income rises in consumer-based economy, demand for new workers appears in every sector of the economy.

The idea that investment in stocks is inherently not beneficial to the economy is just as bad as the idea that cutting taxes solves anything and everything or that banks are useless.
Stock markets and banks are essential to a modern economy. They provide for the flow of capital between those who have money and don't need at the moment and those who need money.
Now there are issues and some transactions that have minimal, if any, benefit for the economy or present costs that may exceed benefits. The aforementioned high-frequency transactions are one issue in the market. A bigger issue is a lot of speculative investments where money is put into assets that are not used in business and can drive up prices of the asset and harm the economy. At the same time, these types of transactions are essential to businesses for hedging and reducing risks.

It is a very complicated to determine whether a transaction is beneficial because almost all types of transactions are beneficial if used under the right circumstances and in moderation. As such, it is nearly impossible to separate wanted and unwanted transactions and impose restrictions.


Ummm...yeah no. Our financial markets are not an attribute of a sophisticated society they are merely a sophisticated way of transferring money from plebs that produce to the wealthy that do not.

They also create volatility when there inherently is very little. Economies of scale are complex and robust naturally. To wreck an economy without markets it takes a wide scale calamity that disrupts supply chains. To wreck our economy now it only takes an emotional over reaction.
 
2012-08-12 12:46:24 PM  

Bloody William: Do you want to know what class warfare is? Class warfare is Contra.

You have one group of people who know the Konami code. They use it at the beginning of the game to get 30 lives. They often beat the game because they have so many chances to keep going. If they fail a few times, they have plenty of resources to keep fighting the boss and reach the next level.

You have another group of people who don't have the Konami code. Or, worse yet, they get punished for entering the Konami code. They get 3 lives and can't continue. If they screw up a few times, they're done. They can't go back. They can't keep going. Very good or lucky players can beat the game with those 3 lives, but the vast majority of both the people in this group and the people in the group who get 30 lives can't. They are the exception.

The people in the former group say that Contra is easy because they can get far and often beat the game, and they point at the few people in the latter group who manage to do it too as proof. That doesn't make Contra actually easy. it only means that one group of people get a great opportunity and tons of extra lives, and a few members of the other group of people are skilled and lucky enough to get as far.


I'm stealing this. I hope you don't mind.
 
2012-08-12 12:48:13 PM  

PanicMan: incendi: clkeagle: Serious question. How does investment in the stock market and other financial instruments help "the economy?"

I already covered that upthread - it allows business access to capital in exchange for equity instead of debt, so they can expand more cheaply. The "other financial instruments" bit becomes more murky, as you start getting into trading risk instead of investing in equity. As for the rest of your post, yes... the conservative party has gone off the rails, pants-on-head retarded with their approach to economic policy.

Um, if I buy 100 shares of GM stock, exactly $0 goes back to GM. The money goes to whoever is selling the stock. That transaction does nothing to the economy, besides whatever taxes (if any) the guy selling it has to pay.


The problem is that people don't like to buy stock without a ready way to dispose of it when the time comes (and it always comes) unless compensated for the added risk. Without people buying those shares on the open market the required return would be much higher significantly increasing financing costs for corporations.
 
2012-08-12 12:49:48 PM  

jetzzfan: That's still more than the 49.5% of people that don't pay income taxes

Link


That 49.5% of all Americans who don't pay taxes include demographics like:

2-year olds

How much cash do you intend to squeeze from toddlers?
 
2012-08-12 12:49:59 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: And every one of these jackasses would get a tax hike. But the dipshiats will still vote Republican.


What I see are a bunch of potential millionaires who will get their opportunity to shine if only we increase military spending, start a war with Iran, get rid of medicare, and massively cut taxes on rich people... Oh and cut all social programs that might help blah people.

Vote Romney!
 
2012-08-12 12:50:44 PM  
Make the Poor pay for all the things.
 
2012-08-12 12:54:01 PM  
i64.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-12 01:05:37 PM  

jetzzfan: That's still more than the 49.5% of people that don't pay income taxes


Have you ever heard of this thing called sales tax? How about this thing called payroll taxes?

Next you'll be whining that, as a minimum wage worker, my effective tax rate on all my capital gains is zero percent*.

* because I don't have any
 
2012-08-12 01:06:37 PM  

Dog Welder: jetzzfan: That's still more than the 49.5% of people that don't pay income taxes

Link

That 49.5% of all Americans who don't pay taxes include demographics like:

2-year olds

How much cash do you intend to squeeze from toddlers?


Those little pricks have been having a free ride long enough.
 
2012-08-12 01:07:43 PM  

Harry_Seldon: This is Paul Ryan's future....

[comicbook.com image 352x400]


He's going to look like a washed porn star?
 
2012-08-12 01:15:12 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: AnEvilGuest: There is something to be said for my having more of my profits left over to re-invest in terms of encouraging investment and entrepreneurship.

You do know that reinvestments into your own company don't count toward your tax liability, right?


Yes and as far as the business goes I'm a code monkey who got an ownership stake in lieu of a decent wage 20 years ago, not a real entrepreneur, but I still understand that much :)
 
2012-08-12 01:23:42 PM  

Malivon: How about tax law be completely redone? Set up a simple tax code that can't be reduced, subsidized, or other method of cutting taxes. All that farking paper work is such a drain. Make it so that whatever a person has to go through just to get lower taxes for filling out form, is already done.

They can think of something silly (not to be taken seriously), like this:

A person should automatically keep 75% of whatever the earn, regardless. The remaining 25% should be taxed into brackets.

Simply put: You earn 50,000 - You keep 37,500 of it.
The government tosses you into a tax bracket in X level associated with 12,500. That bracket takes into account marital status, offspring, and other factors associated with their living area, city, state, and environmental disasters that may have occurred.
You have the choice of putting more into the government that will be paid back to you at some level of interest.
If you have a disaster at your premises or some life altering situation, that is provable, you can pay half of the taxes owed. If used, this cannot be used within a five year span.
You're taxed based on the 25% of what is owed. You keep any remaining %.


How about this? Eliminate the Federal income tax completely. Eliminate all Federal entitlement programs. The Feds are now essentially responsible for defense, interest on the deficit, and interstate commerce; call it $700 billion a year. Collect that money directly from the states, each state being responsible for its share as a percentage of population. Essentially everyone in the US would have to pay $2200 in taxes each year, total. Beyond that, it's every state for itself. Want Social Security for your elderly? Fund it with your state income tax. Same goes fo medical care, education and infrastructure.

Under this plan, here in Massachusetts I would expect my overall tax burden to drop 25% for the exact same services I'm getting now. We only get 75 cents back from the Feds for every tax dollar we send in, so for us and the other Blue States which overwhelmingly make up the net overpayers of Federal taxes, this plan would be a winner. Heck, I'd even be willing to pay a little more to help out states like Rhode Island and Hawaii. We could send funds to them directly, cutting out the middle man.

Of course red Federal welfare recipient states (looking at you, entire Deep South and western US east of the Rockies) would soon become post apocalyptic hellscapes as the Federal teat dried up. We'd probably have to abandon Alaska outright. But you know, that's what they want. They earned it, they should get to keep it... and not a penny more.
 
2012-08-12 01:24:13 PM  

incendi: starsrift: Problem #1 is that money gained from investing in stock is money for no work. That is to say, a stockholder contributes no actual value to the economy, they are a parasite of it.

Well, sort of. The market provides an important function, providing a source of working capital in exchange for equity. This makes it much easier for companies to expand quickly as opposed to issuing debt or simply working within the constraints of their current cash flow, and is good for the economy. The trading after initial issuance of the equity allows the first big-money investors to regroup and invest in other things. So, when you buy your hundred-year old share of proctor and gamble or whatever, you can say that yes, you didn't actually contribute shiat to P&G, and neither did the last 50 people who held that particular share, but you freed someone else's capital to invest in something else. The net effect is that the market as a whole has the capacity to gracefully absorb new issuances, providing capital to companies willing to exchange equity for it.


This is actually not true. The company you invested in, they're gonna keep making widgets, selling burgers, whatever. They're adding value to the economy, and the operation of the business doesn't actually care about who holds the title to it.
What you've done here is conflate venture capitalists with shareholders. A venture capitalist may BECOME a shareholder, if their investment results in a successful start-up - and then eventual successful IPO - but your premise is incorrect. There are cases, like you say, where a company sells stock to make money in order to expand - but that's actually a false positive. If the market for the whatever is there, the free market - the ACTUAL free market, not some invisible hand - will fill it. If a company couldn't sell the shares to raise the money, and couldn't get a loan from a bank for the expansion, a competitor would step in - or arise. You can see this all the time, especially in small towns that don't attract big franchises - some mom and pop place will open up to sell the same crap. Fast food is especially obvious and easy to point out, though there are other things.

Buying and selling shares, getting dividends, it's just a shell game.
 
2012-08-12 01:24:56 PM  
My husband and I live comfortably. Of course, we would like to be making more (who wouldn't?) but if my taxes went up just a wee bit and went to schools, healthcare, infrastructure, etc.. I'd be OKAY with that. I'm lucky to live my lifestyle. If an extra amount per year means I can help someone else have something like HEALTHCARE, so be it.

I don't understand these multimillionaires who aren't willing to do the same. I really, really, really don't.
 
Displayed 50 of 310 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report