Americans of all kinds would agree that wealth should be redistributed???

• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;514538 wrote:Ummm....well......uhhh......not to be too flippant, but WTH.....because Obama SAID IT.

  
  Put your degree to good use.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-june2010.pdf
• isadore

  HitsRus;514614 wrote:^^^you use such loaded words, and then dismiss the charge of 'class warfare.' How disingenuous. The first thing you need to do is to acknowledge that all rich people are not greedy and selfish, lest all the less fortunate people be characterized as lazy and irresponsible. Neither is the case.

  
  while you try to claim equivalency between the poor and the greedily selfish there is none as there is none between the victims and the perpetrators.
• isadore

  CenterBHSFan;514619 wrote:How much do you think the government should be allowed to take in the hopes that there will be no more "unfortunate" people left in America?

  the amount provided by a truly progressive tax system so poverty can be eliminated in our nation. there are unfortunate Americans. the lack of regulation to curb rampant greed has created a growing number
• BGFalcons82

  

  Bigdogg;514620 wrote:Put your degree to good use.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-june2010.pdf

  
  You asked for evidence of the current regime wanting to redistribute wealth and I told you Obama said it and you respond with the history of tax rates? Nice pivot, but you seem to believe tax rates equate to redistribution. While this is most of it, it isn't all of it, as the current regime is distributing money that doesn't even exist. I'll bite just the same.
  
  It is impossible to compare tax rates from different eras without a complete undertaking of all taxes. While it is very easy to find a tax table on the internet, it takes more research to find all taxes that were in effect. For example, the corporate income taxes, capital gains, the Death Tax, gift taxes, tax shelters, business write-offs, etc. and their rates, rules, and regulations are not mentioned on your little chart. Neither were FICA and Medicaire, which have had their rates adjusted over the years, and I suspect are about to be adjusted again after the Debt Commission reports on 12-1-10. You have compared different eras with differing tax situations/regulations and just throw it out there and tell me to use my degree. I think I just did.
• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;514672 wrote:You asked for evidence of the current regime wanting to redistribute wealth and I told you Obama said it and you respond with the history of tax rates? Nice pivot, but you seem to believe tax rates equate to redistribution. While this is most of it, it isn't all of it, as the current regime is distributing money that doesn't even exist. I'll bite just the same.
  
  It is impossible to compare tax rates from different eras without a complete undertaking of all taxes. While it is very easy to find a tax table on the internet, it takes more research to find all taxes that were in effect. For example, the corporate income taxes, capital gains, the Death Tax, gift taxes, tax shelters, business write-offs, etc. and their rates, rules, and regulations are not mentioned on your little chart. Neither were FICA and Medicaire, which have had their rates adjusted over the years, and I suspect are about to be adjusted again after the Debt Commission reports on 12-1-10. You have compared different eras with differing tax situations/regulations and just throw it out there and tell me to use my degree. I think I just did. [/QUOT
  
  You offer no proof just talking points from Fox. The tax rates are the tax rates what I said I backed up. You want adjust for different eras ok the data is available. Go back to BGSU and this time try going to some of your classes instead.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr177.pdf

• CenterBHSFan

  

  Bigdogg;515483 wrote:You offer no proof just talking points from Fox. The tax rates are the tax rates what I said I backed up. You want adjust for different eras ok the data is available. Go back to BGSU and this time try going to some of your classes instead.
  
  http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr177.pdf

  
  Why does his thoughts or opinions have to be/come from FOX?
  
  Do you not think that he might have his own thoughts and views?!
• BGFalcons82

  

  Bigdogg;515483 wrote:You offer no proof just talking points from Fox. The tax rates are the tax rates what I said I backed up. You want adjust for different eras ok the data is available. Go back to BGSU and this time try going to some of your classes instead.

  
  I think your screen name is too short....it should be BigdoggBone. As in...you just won't let go of the bone, no matter what is posted. Fox talking points? Really? I didn't know tax rates was even a topic on Fox.
  
  If you would do just a wee bit of research, you will quickly find that you cannot compare different tax rates from different eras without reviewing ALL taxes that were applicable at each time. For example, when the highest rates were 90%, how many people actually paid this amount? Who in their right mind would work night and day only to have 90% of their hard work confiscated by Uncle Sam? There were dozens of ways to shelter their income and hide it in trusts and capital accounts that Uncle Sam was not taxing at that time. Example #2 - there was no AMT prior to about 1972. Come on now...I've done some of the work for you and now you won't learn unless you do the rest of it yourself. I know you can do it with your dog bone attitude.
• majorspark

  

  CenterBHSFan;515539 wrote:Why does his thoughts or opinions have to be/come from FOX?
  
  Do you not think that he might have his own thoughts and views?!

  
  This was my thought as well. The irony of it is Bigdogg was using typical talking points of the left. I am surprised he did not go all the way and be extra cool and call it Faux News.
• cbus4life

  majorspark;515644 wrote:This was my thought as well. The irony of it is Bigdogg was using typical talking points of the left. I am surprised he did not go all the way and be extra cool and call it Faux News.

  
  About as cool as saying PMSNBC or "lame-stream media."
• jmog

  IggyPride00;511711 wrote: Can it really be coincidence that the 2 largest financial collapses in the past century have been at the points in which the highest amount of wealth was concentrated in the fewest amount of hands?
  

  
  Don't believe the propaganda, the recession in the Carter years was far worse than the current one. As anyone who was an adult at the time.
• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;515595 wrote:I think your screen name is too short....it should be BigdoggBone. As in...you just won't let go of the bone, no matter what is posted. Fox talking points? Really? I didn't know tax rates was even a topic on Fox.
  
  If you would do just a wee bit of research, you will quickly find that you cannot compare different tax rates from different eras without reviewing ALL taxes that were applicable at each time. For example, when the highest rates were 90%, how many people actually paid this amount? Who in their right mind would work night and day only to have 90% of their hard work confiscated by Uncle Sam? There were dozens of ways to shelter their income and hide it in trusts and capital accounts that Uncle Sam was not taxing at that time. Example #2 - there was no AMT prior to about 1972. Come on now...I've done some of the work for you and now you won't learn unless you do the rest of it yourself. I know you can do it with your dog bone attitude.

  
  The second link compares all taxes. I am still waiting on you to prove Obama is confiscating our wealth. All you can do is mouth off. It is easy to spout off when you have no clue what the issues are, and nothing will change your mind until the next idiot gets into office and continues the same screwing we have been getting over the past 50 years. The difference is you will be happy because you think your guy will be better.
• fan_from_texas

  cbus4life;515791 wrote:About as cool as saying PMSNBC or "lame-stream media."

  
  
  This made me laugh out loud.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  jmog;515875 wrote:Don't believe the propaganda, the recession in the Carter years was far worse than the current one. As anyone who was an adult at the time.

  
  Completely disagree, wasn't an adult but lived through it. The Carter recession had an end in sight, we still had our manufacturing base, our national debt was a fraction of what it is now, and the Fed had room to reduce interest rates (in fact we caused the recession to last longer to curb off the rampant inflation). Today, we have lost our manufacturing base, we have the aforementioned debt problems, and the Fed has no room to cut interest rates more, unless we charge consumers to keep their money in depositary accounts - and there isn't an end in sight. There was definitely more of an energy crisis/rationing then, but IMO it pales in consideration to the debt crisis this country will be facing for years.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  isadore;514644 wrote:the amount provided by a truly progressive tax system so poverty can be eliminated in our nation. there are unfortunate Americans. the lack of regulation to curb rampant greed has created a growing number

  
  And just what god-like being gets to decide the threshold here?
  
  Talk about something to scare the bejeesus out of you.
  
  I will say this: every time I read what some of you write about economics, it reinforces very strongly my decision to be conservative in face of the pandering and divisive class warfare that results from your thinking. I refuse to resent and punish people for being successful, because history has shown if there's enough of those folks -- everybody ends up winning.
• BGFalcons82

  

  Bigdogg;515937 wrote:The second link compares all taxes. I am still waiting on you to prove Obama is confiscating our wealth. All you can do is mouth off. It is easy to spout off when you have no clue what the issues are, and nothing will change your mind until the next idiot gets into office and continues the same screwing we have been getting over the past 50 years. The difference is you will be happy because you think your guy will be better.

  
  No, the second link is about Tax Freedom Day. Nice try, but you are lazy. Try this....go to the irs.gov site and spend some time reading the rules and regs. If you have never been there, the federal tax code is thousands upon thousands of pages long. If you can stay awake, you will find the explosion of the tax code over the past 20 years. The tax rates, tables, tax-freedom days, yadda, yadda, barf are not anywhere near comparable from the days of 90% rates to todays top rates. Instead of just throwing easy-to-find tables and graphs on here, do some research and some thinking about how the tax code has never remained static and has always attempted to get more money from the EEEvil rich....and usually failed. That is why the fair tax (www.fairtax.org) would be so much better for Americans as it's based on consumption, not on earnings. But I digress.
  
  My guy is Chris Christie, and if he changes his mind about running...there's going to be lots of bureaucrats and unions getting screwed, which is not the same as we've had for 50 years.
• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;517258 wrote:No, the second link is about Tax Freedom Day. Nice try, but you are lazy. Try this....go to the irs.gov site and spend some time reading the rules and regs. If you have never been there, the federal tax code is thousands upon thousands of pages long. If you can stay awake, you will find the explosion of the tax code over the past 20 years. The tax rates, tables, tax-freedom days, yadda, yadda, barf are not anywhere near comparable from the days of 90% rates to todays top rates. Instead of just throwing easy-to-find tables and graphs on here, do some research and some thinking about how the tax code has never remained static and has always attempted to get more money from the EEEvil rich....and usually failed. That is why the fair tax (www.fairtax.org) would be so much better for Americans as it's based on consumption, not on earnings. But I digress.
  
  My guy is Chris Christie, and if he changes his mind about running...there's going to be lots of bureaucrats and unions getting screwed, which is not the same as we've had for 50 years.

  
  You are too much!! You stated Obama was hell bent on confiscating our wealth. I stated you are full of shit and asked for examples twice. You provided none. The tax freedom link offers calculations of total tax burden going back to 1900. (There was no federal income tax then, but there were state and other taxes.) The foundation's expected tax burden for 2010 is 26.9 percent, up slightly from the 2009 tax burden of 26.6 percent. This is not unusual the tax burden typically falls during recessions, as taxpayers move to lower tax brackets. I claimed that the total tax now is lower then it was under Reagan. According to the data supplied, under Reagan, it ranged from 29.2 percent to 31.1 percent, meaning that in all eight years it was higher than the current tax burden under Obama.
  
  I can't say I spend a lot of time looking at the tax code maybe you do, bully for you. You made a ridiculous claim and offer no facts . All I hear is talking points and rhetoric you are repeating from the right. I am done wasting my time.
  
  As far as your boy Christie, yep he looks like a real common sense outsider guy. Lawyer, and lobbyist for the firm of Dughi, Hewit & Palatucci, where he was big into deregulation of New Jersey's electric and gas industry and the not to mention succesfull in blocking the inclusion of securities fraud under the state's Consumer Fraud Act. Lets throw in a little bit of awarding a multimillion dollar, no-bid contract to David Kelley, another former U.S. Attorney, who had investigated Christie's brother, Todd Christie, in a 2005 fraud case involving traders at the Wall Street firm. And lets not forget all the success he had with his warrantless cellphone tracking cases. He has my vote also! LOL
• BGFalcons82

  

  ^^^ The only example I need is what came out of the Annointed One's own freaking mouth that he said he wants to redistribute wealth. He admitted that's what he thinks is "fair". What other proof do you need that he believes it? I'm not doing a freaking term paper for you, but if you Google: Obama Redistribution Of Wealth, you'll get 434,000 results. You claim I'm full of shit, but there are thousands of reasons I'm not. Enjoy your homework.
  
  You're the one coming back with tax tables and tax freedom day. Does tax freedom day calculate the amount of gas tax you are going to fork over the rest of the year? Does it calculate the Death Tax when it magically knows when you're going to die? Does it calculate your phone tax? How does it know how many capital gains taxes you are going to pay when you trade commodities and stocks all year long? The tax code is the most convoluted piece of garbage in our country and there is no one alive that understands all of it's nuances....yet....if they go to tax freedom day, it's a freaking piece of cake to understand. Really? You still fail to understand tax rates and regulations from generation to generation, so I am done with you as well.
  
  Gee...Christie is a lawyer, eh? Isn't Obama one also? Lobbyist? Wasn't Obama a community agitator (whatever the F that is)? Your arguments are lame, however I understand the Left's hatred of the man, as he is trying to restore fiscal sanity to a corrupt state. I'm really surprised you didn't mention his weight. Maybe that's next.....
• Bigdogg

  BGFalcons82;517492 wrote:^^^ The only example I need is what came out of the Annointed One's own freaking mouth that he said he wants to redistribute wealth. He admitted that's what he thinks is "fair". What other proof do you need that he believes it? I'm not doing a freaking term paper for you, but if you Google: Obama Redistribution Of Wealth, you'll get 434,000 results. You claim I'm full of shit, but there are thousands of reasons I'm not. Enjoy your homework.
  
  You're the one coming back with tax tables and tax freedom day. Does tax freedom day calculate the amount of gas tax you are going to fork over the rest of the year? Does it calculate the Death Tax when it magically knows when you're going to die? Does it calculate your phone tax? How does it know how many capital gains taxes you are going to pay when you trade commodities and stocks all year long? The tax code is the most convoluted piece of garbage in our country and there is no one alive that understands all of it's nuances....yet....if they go to tax freedom day, it's a freaking piece of cake to understand. Really? You still fail to understand tax rates and regulations from generation to generation, so I am done with you as well.
  
  Gee...Christie is a lawyer, eh? Isn't Obama one also? Lobbyist? Wasn't Obama a community agitator (whatever the F that is)? Your arguments are lame, however I understand the Left's hatred of the man, as he is trying to restore fiscal sanity to a corrupt state. I'm really surprised you didn't mention his weight. Maybe that's next.....

  
  Now that you mentioned it, he is a fat bastard also!
• fan_from_texas

  Bigdogg;517454 wrote:As far as your boy Christie, yep he looks like a real common sense outsider guy. Lawyer, and lobbyist for the firm of Dughi, Hewit & Palatucci, where he was big into deregulation of New Jersey's electric and gas industry

  I don't know enough to speak to the rest of your post, but as far as the deregulation of NJ's energy industry, it's largely been a success and heralded as a great new model for other states. The EDECA has been very successful in cutting prices, encouraging innovation, and supporting cost-effective renewable energy capacity development. If anything, he should be lauded for his work there, not denigrated for it.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  fan_from_texas;519352 wrote:I don't know enough to speak to the rest of your post, but as far as the deregulation of NJ's energy industry, it's largely been a success and heralded as a great new model for other states. The EDECA has been very successful in cutting prices, encouraging innovation, and supporting cost-effective renewable energy capacity development. If anything, he should be lauded for his work there, not denigrated for it.

  
  Oh, snap!
• Footwedge

  BGFalcons82;515595 wrote:I think your screen name is too short....it should be BigdoggBone. As in...you just won't let go of the bone, no matter what is posted. Fox talking points? Really? I didn't know tax rates was even a topic on Fox.
  
  If you would do just a wee bit of research, you will quickly find that you cannot compare different tax rates from different eras without reviewing ALL taxes that were applicable at each time. For example, when the highest rates were 90%, how many people actually paid this amount? Who in their right mind would work night and day only to have 90% of their hard work confiscated by Uncle Sam? There were dozens of ways to shelter their income and hide it in trusts and capital accounts that Uncle Sam was not taxing at that time. Example #2 - there was no AMT prior to about 1972. Come on now...I've done some of the work for you and now you won't learn unless you do the rest of it yourself. I know you can do it with your dog bone attitude.

  
  
  You see, this type of diatribe is annoying. Bigdogg posted facts from a source, and you flail your arms around calling foul. One of the biggest misconceptions is that Reagan cut taxes....well, he didn't. Did he promote "distribution of wealth"? Was he a closet socialist?
  
  Let's review what reagan actually did do. He cut the rates of income tax...true....but he also increased payroll taxes at a higher percentage. Want more? It was Reagan who finally put the kabosh on people loopholing taxes....such as credit card interest payments.
  
  Having an opinion is great. But when facts ruin your theory, it's time to man up and take responsibility for being in error.
• Footwedge

  BGFalcons82;517492 wrote:^^^ The only example I need is what came out of the Annointed One's own freaking mouth that he said he wants to redistribute wealth. He admitted that's what he thinks is "fair". What other proof do you need that he believes it? I'm not doing a freaking term paper for you, but if you Google: Obama Redistribution Of Wealth, you'll get 434,000 results. You claim I'm full of shit, but there are thousands of reasons I'm not. Enjoy your homework.
  
  You're the one coming back with tax tables and tax freedom day. Does tax freedom day calculate the amount of gas tax you are going to fork over the rest of the year? Does it calculate the Death Tax when it magically knows when you're going to die? Does it calculate your phone tax? How does it know how many capital gains taxes you are going to pay when you trade commodities and stocks all year long? The tax code is the most convoluted piece of garbage in our country and there is no one alive that understands all of it's nuances....yet....if they go to tax freedom day, it's a freaking piece of cake to understand. Really? You still fail to understand tax rates and regulations from generation to generation, so I am done with you as well.
  
  
  You see, this type of diatribe is annoying. Bigdogg posted facts from a source, and you flail your arms around calling foul. One of the biggest misconceptions is that Reagan cut taxes....well, he didn't. Did he promote "distribution of wealth"? Was he a closet socialist?
  
  Let's review what reagan actually did do. He cut the rates of income tax...true....but he also increased payroll taxes at a higher percentage. Want more? It was Reagan who finally put the kabosh on people loopholing taxes....such as credit card interest payments.

• BGFalcons82

  

  Footwedge;519527 wrote:You see, this type of diatribe is annoying. Bigdogg posted facts from a source, and you flail your arms around calling foul. One of the biggest misconceptions is that Reagan cut taxes....well, he didn't. Did he promote "distribution of wealth"? Was he a closet socialist?
  
  Let's review what reagan actually did do. He cut the rates of income tax...true....but he also increased payroll taxes at a higher percentage. Want more? It was Reagan who finally put the kabosh on people loopholing taxes....such as credit card interest payments.

  
  Hhmmm....I'll have to go back and check, but I'm pretty sure I didn't bring Reagan into this thread. You call me annoying, and then go on to reinforce the point I was making with your last sentence.
  
  Tax laws evolve, contract, expand, get re-written, get ignored, taxes get targeted, taxes gets raised, taxes get lowered....per your last sentence. So how in the hell can you compare tax conditions from 1955 to 2010 without researching and allowing for all of these dynamic changes? BigDogg tells us to go to the Tax Freedom tables and it's all magically in front of us. I'm saying that's intellectually vacuous...as annoying as that may be.
• gut

  Agree this demonstrates lack of understanding of economics. For every Bill Gates, THOUSANDS of small business owners failed. Ignoring the value-added wealth down the chain thanks to Gates, the fact remains that the top 20% own 80% because, for the most part, they are the ones taking the risk and creating value. You want to reduce that payoff and the trickle down effects could be disastrous. Get to a point where it makes more sense for Bill Gates to take a job putting nuts and screws on car doors and look at the opportunity cost.
  
  You have to be careful hammering more on the corporate tax front. US corp taxes are already very high and arguably uncompetitive. If there's a shortcoming in the system, it's the small business owners that create like 80% of the jobs and for whom $50-$200k is a good expected living. Those are truly the people you have to be very aware of incentives with, because of the risk/reward isn't there they go work for someone else rather than start their own business that creates jobs.
• Devils Advocate

  

  Pelosi
  
  Oama
  
  Or....
  
  Reid
  
  What you see is what we got....