the only way millionaires got their wealth is through these corrupt systems - don't give government yoru tax dollars - put your money where your mouth is and HAND out money to those will to start new business - now WAR business but rather free energy - improved health care - get ride of pills and stop causes - government just gives money to bankers - so your tax dollars are just going to the rich and not the 99% - be smart with your money
@SMWhit3out Ask yourself what those tax cuts have done for this country the last 8+ years. Answer: not a damn thing except increase the deficit. Republicans and their supporters can hold on to that "low taxes and deregulation creates jobs" bullshit myth but we've seen otherwise. The rich are pocketing that money, slashing jobs and laughing at you idiots. 8 years is long enough for this failed experiment. I say fuck'em and go back to the old tax rates when this country was actually stable.
@BrutallyH0nest You know why it doesn't work? and the reason why we are so fucked? Because both party's got what they wanted at the same time. That is the Worst case scenario. Democratic spending in the white house on bullshit minimum wage, obamacare, union support(killing america), endless small business regulations, failed social security and failed government subsidies. Paired with Republican Military industrial complex spending, no Gold standard, and no attempt to decrease a large government
Obamacare? What a fascinating adoption of the corporate elite term used to refer to public healthcare. I believe a Fox memo actually advised their shills not to use the term because it had overwhelming support from the public that would benefit from it? You know, the public that has a life expectancy equivalent to Cuba, a country with 1/14th of the healthcare expenditure per capita? In a country alone in the industrial world with its advocacy of private healthcare?
@gamerunknown People in America behave badly. They dont exercise, eat fattening foods.and too much of them. The consequences of these behaviors have bad consequences, that have nothing at all to do with health care. These behaviors also lead to lots of expensive care. The way to judge quality, is with survival rates OF those with specific problems, the availability of care.
This is the fundamental attribution error at play. We shouldn't blame these problems on bad behaviours, we look at the epidemiology of what causes obesity. If I had to guess: it's best covered by the "irrational actor theory": that is, people respond to corporate propaganda that promotes sedentary behaviour (fast food, TV, cars) and has inadequate social programs to combat them. Similar in UK: 65%~ adult pop overweight to obese vs. US 68%~, yet better health outcomes.
@gamerunknown Bull. Among men, in the US diagnosed with cancer, 62.9% live another 5 years, in the UK only 44.8% do. With women in the US, 66.3% live, and in UK 52.7% do. 44% of Americans who could benefit from statins take them, while UK folks are only 23%. Over 50% of entire worlds new drugs developed in US last 20yrs. The US has more than double the CAT scanners, MRI machines per capita as UK does, etc.
@gamerunknown "U.S. obesity rate will rise from 32 percent", " U.K. obesity rate will rise from 26 percent". "Report noted 1 % population-wide decrease in body-mass index (just 1.9 pounds for an average 198-pound adult) would prevent more than 2 million cases of diabetes, roughly 1.5 million cases of heart disease and stroke, and 73,000 to 127,000 cancer cases in US." US has more obesity, and a LITTLE screws up MANY, costing money. Thats why.
Not to mention, the US is higher in terms of infant mortality. While there may be a tenuous connection between obesity and infant mortality, the US has 33% obese women to the UK's 24%. Chen showed using 1988 data that obese women were 33% more likely to deliver a dead baby, so to account for obesity one would predict a roughly 4% increase in rates of infant mortality. Instead we see a 77% increase over the UK according to the CIA factbook.
@gamerunknown With the same study, infant mortality rates in the US reflect the fact they have far more high tech procedures to keep, and try to save the early pregnancies, and many other nations do not take premature births into account. However, dont you think inner city drug addicts who never get care because they are too lazy and stupid to use MediCare have an effect? I never have been to the UK, but I always felt they were more civilized than South Central Los Angeles,
Just world hypothesis there (this system rewards diligence, the lazy and stupid die). I can't find any evidence that there's a different medical cut off point for resuscitation attempts in the US - very few babies survive from 22-24 weeks, which is the cut off point for abortions in the UK and resuscitation attempts in the US, so presumably both attempt to save children born at that point.
@gamerunknown OMG, Its reporting, not cut off dates. RACE "National Center for Health Stats,1997,mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) for infants born to black mothers was 13.7 compared to 8.7 for American Indians, 7.9 for Puerto Ricans, 6.0 for WHITES.".Any WHITES in UK, genius? "Income, education: Infants born to low-income mothers who did not finish high school were about 50% more likely to die than infants whose mothers finished college". Study RESULTS from TREATING disease.
Excellent, but there's an extraneous variable: non-whites are more likely to be working class. So all you've done is demonstrate that healthcare in the US discriminates against the working class, who are more likely to die under it (read my quote on Lee Atwater's dog whistle below). Why would any of them (Sowell) support such a system? Because they've been indoctrinated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, among others. You said they "save early preg" btw - cut off.
@gamerunknown Non whites more likely, on a % basis to be wards of the State. Except for the illegal aliens, who have the very highest employment rates, higher than everyone, including whites. They come here with nothing, no English, no education, just a T-shirt, baseball cap, and a pair of jeans, and in no time at all are driving SUV`s and pickups, BBQ`ing on weekends, and nailing broads. Why? Govt doesnt give them shit, so they work.
They're wards of the state because they have higher rates of unemployment. Take from that what you will, the Irish had higher rates of unemployment when they were recent immigrants and when employment rates picked up there was a myth that they were stealing jobs. If one wants to learn a language, one immerses oneself. They have no other places to work because NAFTA means they can't compete with subsidised American goods.
@gamerunknown Who are "they"? Certainly not illegals. My point, maybe I failed to really make it well, is that Americans who are poor, do so voluntarily. Illegals find work easily, and when you get a crap job, you change it later for a little better crap job. Eventually, you climb out of the crap, unless the govt gives you a handout, when you just say fuck it, I`ll watch Oprah and roll another joint. Besides, poor in America already HAVE goverment insurance, MediCaid.
Wards of the state - ethnic minorities. Changing crap jobs for better jobs: not true, funny Austrian school myth. Wages are the minimum the employers can give them - working several jobs just in order to subsist under a form of wage slavery.
@gamerunknown I hired illegal aliens for 3 decades. They cross the borger, and within 4 months are making $5 or $600 a week, and in 3 or 4 years making $8 or $900 a week. All coming with NO English, 5th grade educations, and just the clothes they have on. Meanwhile, I am supposed to believe that inner city minorities cant find a job in 3 generations! That MILLIONS of Americans NEED 99 weeks unemployment, at the same time 12 million illegals are here, without unemployment, welfare?
@gamerunknown Fed I-9 Form, where employer signs, "I attest, under penalty of perjury, that I have examined the document(s) presented by the above named employee, that the above named document(s) appear to be genuine, and relate to the employee named". There also are WARNINGS not to discriminate! NO legal REQUIREMENT to E-Verify, either! Twice, I HAD Immigration check businesses I ran, and had to fire 6 or so people whose documents appeared real. No fine, no nothing. NO LAW BROKEN.
Also, 49% of illegal immigrants have not completed high school education according to a Pew Report and they in general have a lower wage than native workers. They are useful to the employer because they can be exploited more readily (no healthcare, no employment tribunals): the same reason children had higher rates of employment before the factory act. Not to mention the fact that they support a redundant population by way of remittance.
Ultimately, the person owning the means of production and those charging rent or interest will accumulate the greater part of the profits by utilising the surplus value of another's labour. A marginal increase in wages means nothing when the purchasing power of the bottom 20% and middle 20% has remained stable since the '70s (increased financialisation of the economy) and the top 1% has shot up drastically.
@gamerunknown In 70`s, top personal tax rate higher than corp tax rate. When top personal rate lowered, it was good tax wise, to move CEO & Exec rewards from corp taxed basis, to personal tax basis. This increased Adj Gross Income, without actual increases. IRA`s, 401k`s have limits, reduce AGI of middle class far more than wealthy. Earned income credit, child tax credits, INCREASED income of low incomes, AFTER AGI is already calculated. Inequality far overstated, from tax changes
@gamerunknown During Clinton Admin, Federal Reserve noted the rich spent 88% of income, saved 12%. During Bush, the rich spent more than incomes, actually spending all, and taking on debt. It is absurd to believe that this spending didnt go into anyone elses hands. Fed also notes over half of bottom 20% moved into higher quintile in 9 yrs. Also, 12 million illegals work and live, without welfare, unemployment, food stamps, they have no SS #`s. Plenty of opportunities here.
How was rich defined? The accumulation trends towards a smaller number of people controlling a greater proportion of resources (trickle up theory), average labour has increased in the US with no increase in actual wages (adjusting for inflation). 95% of "money" in the United States is in the form of promises to pay: even if we ignore the problems of fiat currency, that's an incredible ratio (see Money as Debt for more info).
@gamerunknown Top 5%. "Rich Americans Save Tax Cuts Instead of Spending". Bloomberg, Timothy R. Homan" Moodys sifted govt, & Fed data. Title says rich SAVE tax cuts, implying something far different than facts in article, "saving rate fell from 12.1 percent in the second quarter to 9.5 percent in the 1st quarter 1994" Rich SPENT balance, 88% or MORE! "June 2001"..."savings climbed to 2.8 % first quarter 2002 from minus 2% 2nd quarter 2001" So spent MORE than earned, or ONLY 97%
Cui bono? No commesurate increase in quality of life of population. No decrease in debt for the population. To whom do they owe money? Themselves, or more accurately, those lending money. Those that control debt control those that control the means of production that in turn control those running capitalist think tanks which in turn dictate acceptable public policy and the range of opinions seen in corporate media.
@gamerunknown 1) Govt has a monopoly over money. 2) Congress created the Central Bank, the Fed 3) The Fed pushes interest rates low. Low rates discourage savings (low returns), encourage debt ( easy payments) 4) Tax rewards for mortgage debt 5) penalty taxation on savings/ investment earnings 5) personal failure rewarded by safety net 6) personal success penalized progressive taxes. ANY wonder perverse incentives such as these punishing good behavior, rewarding bad FAILS?
Government does not have a monopoly over money, that's an absurd statement. The government is in debt... How would that be possible if they were pulling the strings? Many politicians become millionaires, but that's usually by pandering to those that control either the means of production or the debt creators. The safety net is necessary as industries collapse naturally: did you even bother to read Hazlitt? Progressive taxation doesn't fail, Scandi countries > US.
@gamerunknown Govts all over the world have a monopoly on money. They decree, by law or fiat, that we accept their currencies. Do we have other options? I reread Economics in One Lesson again, a month ago. Our safety net is too big. 12 million illegals living here, working, without safety nets. Does it make sense to pay Americans NOT to work, attracting illegals here to work? Much of income inequality is false, due to tax changes. Much of truth due to govts perverse incentives
They don't, because the majority of purchases on any given Sunday are made with debt. Full employment was decried by Milton Friedman and dismissed as impossible by Marx: an industrial reserve army must be maintained. How best to maintain it? Ideally in a Capitalist system by forcing them to rely on parish charity (alms of fellow working class) to increase dissension. In a Communist system, pay them to work semi-productively. 1% income always increases.
@gamerunknown Please direct me to the free market currency in use. Please direct me to where I can get loans, in this free market currency. You do realize ( guess not really) that debt is expressed in terms of the currency?
Debt is a promise to pay, the valorisation into currency, capital or other resources does not matter. It's as illusory as claiming that fiat currency is a representation of an aliquot amount of gold. The important issues are labour and relations between means of production.
Debt is a promise to pay dollars which are a promise from the federal to pay an aliquot amount of gold which is the valorisation of labour in commodity form. However, banks do not have to have a reserve of physical dollars in order to create a balance for an individual and that's where the 19:1 ratio comes from.
@gamerunknown There is NO Federal promise to pay gold on dollars. To people, this was changed in 1933, and for foreign central banks, the Fed Reserve stopped officially in 1971. It is really not possible to have a coherent conversation with you, unless you began to say something, on occasion at least, that isnt bullshit.
@gamerunknown I said, "They decree, by law or fiat, that we accept their currencies.". That means, they create the money, force us by law to accept it for all debts, "Fiat". They can just print it, and buy Treasury bonds, enabling Govt to spend, and devalue our work, and savings. We are deprived of commodity based currencies, govt, or private. THAT is a great degree of control, over us. That doesnt mean they control all dollars, they control creation of dollars, and its nature.
Sorry for the rude response earlier, I was a little drunk and belligerent.I agree that fiat currency is flawed and that a post-monetary economy would be ideal, but I think there's a bigger problem: the majority of "wealth" is in the form of promises to pay. Banks can create balances without having even fiat currency, let alone gold.
Ever heard of Open Source? The protocols for the internet were developed in universities using government grants, then surrendered to private companies.
@gamerunknown Am I to be amazed if Govt takes money the private sector created that nothing will ever come of it? If I rob you, steal $100 from you, am I to point proudly to the single mother with a baby I helped out, by getting a lap dance at the strip club? Did the govt really turn the internet into the money making, job and wealth creating agent it is? Even if you say yes, I wonder if Govt let us keep the $2.5 Tillion its taxing away, cant something helpful come from it?
"Job creators" is a myth perpetuated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The reality is that they are a redundant population attenuated by the surplus labour of workers, subservient only to their shareholders that perpetuate the ideology despite their impoverishment.
@gamerunknown I think we are better off when we can build cars in a modern factory, as opposed to banging on metal with hammers, or farming with a tractor, on irrigated land, instead of using a hoe and praying for rain. One requires a good dose of capital, the other not so much. Of course, lots of folks think capital isnt necessary. Good luck with the hoe. Or, you could use a tree branch. Labor + Capital is better than Labor alone. This awful concept is about "productivity".
Sorry, you're confusing Ludditism with worker control of the means of production. The first revolution attacks the means of production rather than the social relation to it.
@gamerunknown I assume you desire confiscating "the means of production", not purchasing it? If so, you must live with the fact nobody will lend, or invest new capital with you. You will also have to limit wages of workers, to competitive world levels, pay Mgt to competitive world levels, in order to create your own capital, to keep up with the innovation in the world, or your worker corp will get crushed. You also will need to pay high rates to the creative, or they flee.
The principle of remuneration isn't practiced anywhere in the world and it's a principle that doesn't necessarily hold: Linus Torvalds, RoyZimmerman, Costa Gavras, all provide their work for free. Confiscation of the means of production isn't necessary if the concept of property is abolished, or at any rate granted less rights than people.
@gamerunknown I think you meant, "is`nt practiced EVERYWHERE". I do actually believe there are people getting paid in the world. Apart from the obvious, my point was that your utopia couldnt be instantly instituted world world, and unless your worker owned (confiscated) corp was competitive with the rest of us evil capitalists, you would live in poverty. To compete, you would need to create capital.
Wrong, the valorisation of labour is not equivalent to the creation of capital. Capital is the surplus labour delivered as a gift to a redundant population. Individuals in East India subsisted on a form of saag that took 12 hours of labour to produce in a week. Were they living in poverty before their existence was subsumed by capitalist production?
Wage labour is not equivalent to remuneration, people do not receive the valorisation of their labour.
@gamerunknown Nor do they deserve it. If you think just because some dolt works in a factory somewhere that he and all his buddies on a line deserve it all, and the man who built the factory is redundant, you are a silly, ungrateful idiot.
If you think that the individuals that built and designed the factory (or even the designs of the products of the staff's labour) receive remuneration in proportion to their contributions, you're completely mistaken. Constant capital is one of the outlays of production and encompasses the means of production, variable capital is another, but variable capital never accomplishes full remuneration, it always sustains the redundant population.
@gamerunknown If this is true, nothing stops workers from building their own factory, designing their own products, hiring individuals capable of it. They can work, save & use their own capital, or, with their skills, intellect, attract venture capital. When enough intellect is present, this is quite possible. But thats not what you have in mind. You want other folks intellect and capital. My back is wrecked, I`m older, I cant work as young do. I have intellect, and saved capital.
No, I'm afraid it's not, because the redundant population vehemently oppose such a concept and they control the parameters of debate and instil the sense of supremacy of property in the next generation. The last time such audacity was attempted was in Catalonia in Spain in the 1930s.
@gamerunknown The market capitalization of Apple computers is greater than that of Exxon Mobil, and it is a very new corp, relative to Exxon being a leftover from the Standard Oil of Rockeffeller. Guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates in half a lifetime turning the world upside down, creating enormous amounts of wealth. In my world, my parents werent rich, 4 yrs ago we inherit $40K each, but my brother and i are millionaires, he about $10 mill, I liked parties, girls, so not yet $2.
You're mistaken as to what wealth is: neither the Austrian nor the Marxist school supports such statements. If currency were wealth, then the government could simply print as much of it was necessary for everyone to be millionaires, like in Zimbabwe. Wealth is really the valorisation of labour: you have been adept at extracting other's surplus labour, individuals like Jobs even more so.
@gamerunknown When someone owns shares in a corp, real estate, a business, it is normal and common to express them in terms of currency, that doesnt make them currency. I agree with you, and know Adam Smith believed that gold (money) in a treasury was not the measure of a nation`s wealth. But, you are just being an ass.
@gamerunknown Post 2) Illegals are LEGAL to hire, when documents appear GENUINE. Min wage MAY be impossible to live on, but $300/ week is average unemployment check, and millions and millions of Americans choose it, over work. The problem is though, that low paying jobs can turn into higher paying ones. No sane person will go to work for $400 a week, if he gets $300 a week for nothing. When he pays taxes, gasoline, food out of home, its working for nothing
Back on the healthcare issue: after removing the appalling Soviet government (left libertarians are not fans of the USSR any more than right libertarians), there was an unintended consequence: the system of healthcare essentially collapsed and it's only beginning to pick up with Putin's reforms (not that I'm any more a fan of Putin). You can look at the average lifespan charts on wiki for verification.
Variation can mean that the Nevadan population is less well off under exclusively private healthcare. For example, if they have a larger rural population or if fewer of them can afford healthcare. As for whether correcting for homicides would result in the highest lifespan: I doubt it. Under 15k Americans were murdered in 2010, 616k died from coronary disease. Harvard Medical school reports 45k Americans die each year from a lack of medical insurance.
@gamerunknown Post 3) "study by Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider for the American Enterprise Institute found that those exogenous factors are so distorting that if you correct for homicides and accidents, the United States rises to
Unsurprising that you're a racist. To quote you commenting on another video: "fuck you nignog". Lee Atwater put it as "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff.".
Im not from USA and my english is not perfect. In USA dies a lot of people because they cant get health care or they have a crapy insurance. I see a very rich first world countrie with a high mortality rate, i see this like a real big contradiction. Can anybody explain me that??
Jealous of what? The greedy and criminal class? They never created a decent job for their fellow Americans in ten years. Millionaires and Billionaires should be taxed and give their far share. The trickle down theory has always been a myth for 30 years now. One could wonder if that massive spending of two wars and unregulated investing placed the US into a deep eccomic abyss.
When I was a kid none of my friend's mother's worked. Our dad's worked and we all lived in our own homes and we all took vacations and we were all middle class. That class is gone today. That should be the goal of these tax hikes, to make our country more like the 60's -70's when mothers could stay home and be with their children if they wanted to and people could own their homes and take vacations and have average nice lives.
@Pennee101 That's sexist. Your Father could stay home with you, while your Mother is out to work. FYI - There is still a middle class, only we do have people clean our homes now.
Hey Buffet cut a fuckin' check to the Government already!
Oh yeah and why is all his money going to Bill Gates foundation when he dies? Why not give it to the US Government? Since they will spend it so much more wisely.
@FactChecking101 Yeah, cuz we all *hate* having modern infrastructure. Man, if we got rid of all those damn bridges, and dams, we'd be like....ZImbabwe.
@FactChecking101 *You* go live in one of those countries where the wealthiest 0.1% own basically everything. Like Haiti, or Gabon, or basically any place in the third world.
I'd rather live in a place where nationality means something, and where RATIONAL, ENLIGHTENED self-interest means that you want your fellow citizens to have enough so that you need not live behind razor wire to protect yours. America has the people that we have. Folks don't just go away when there's no jobs.
@FactChecking101 Yeah, the poor are all only just a bunch of "welfare queens", and the reason for the crash of 2008 was because America got lazy, and not because Wall Street mistakenly set up a casino where almost everyone was guaranteed to lose (all while having "AAA" ratings on every bet).
It's high time you graduated to Fact Checking 102. Stop being such a hater sociopath about poor people. Many of the work really hard.
@ChollieD And you want your fellow citizens to be able to afford the goods and services you produce. Wasn't that the big dream of Ford? That every Ford employee could afford a car? The US was built on helping your fellow man (oh, and exploiting slaves and the land of the people it was stolen from), but yes, revolutionary ideals NOT the ideals of the rich, the barons, the kings, the despots, working and overtaxing the landless serfs. Oh well.
@FactChecking101 I see why you are FactChecking101 and not 401 or phd. Really. That would be nice. Bridges and dams, and then refugee camps of starving sick people, beggars and thieves and cutthroats on every corner, illiterate work force lining up barefoot in the snow for jobs, if they are well enough to work.Note that most cool countries have some sort of social welfare, as most people dislike watching their neighbors and neighbors' children freeze to death...it takes warmth to live homeless.
The Republicans' masters are turning against them! Even they think the Republicans are doing things wrong! Its time that plutocratic party knows when to stop reducing tax cuts to the rich!
What makes the tax system so terribly unfair nowadays is that the middle class & poor pay a higher social security tax rate than the rich & higher federal tax rate on gasoline, cigarettes, beer, etc in addition to paying a higher overall rate on sales tax, property tax, state gasoline tax, hunting&fishing & gun&marriage & car licenses, & registrations & pernits, tolls, fines, fees, penalties, etc
By the time it's totaled many pay around 20% of income as the super rich often pay around 1%
The man who made the mosr money last year - $15 Billion Dollars -- paid a Income tax rate of 15% & a Social Security Tax rate of less than .0000000000000000001%
More class warfare illusions for the weak minded. The only thing that will fix this is an overhaul of our tax system. A fair and balanced approach where NO person goes without paying their fair share of taxes. To pay nothing is anti-American. Get rid of all write offs. Make everyone pay a percentage, the same percentage.
Capital Gains tax should be abolished if you want people to invest in this country.
@TheYoungTurdz Yeah, the flat tax that you propose is also called a "regressive" tax.
People investing in this country and making a bundle on betting on our hard work (inevitably, sucking up some of the wealth that we created) can pay a share of it back to us. You're welcome for all the work we put in to make your investment a success.
@ChollieD No one owes you anything. You take the job, you know what it pays. A job is a gift and if you don't want it, go start your own business. Then you can overpay people and go bankrupt.
@FactChecking101 "if you don't want it, go start your own business. Then you can overpay people and go bankrupt."
I don't want to get paid more, I want mid-1990's taxes on the rich. It's amusing how often Libertarian arguments end in such operatic ultimata, as if you lot haven't had a fresh or second thought since reading The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged.
Oh, and a job isn't a gift, any more than it is a right. It's a partnership between a capital owner and a person with skills to rent.
@ChollieD You should want to live in a fair and balanaced society. Majority of Americans aspire, then there are those that want to sit back and not contribute at all. We need everyone to have skin in the game! You should be thrilled that someone thought to invest in you, even if you won't invest in yourself.
This entire argument about the millionaires and billionaires is BS. What the President has proposed will hurt the middle class. Everyone who has dividend or investment income will feel it. Obama is comparing Apples & Oranges. Buffet's "secretary" lol, pays the same capital gains tax as Buffet. (long term, more than one year) The stock market will sell off if he raises cap gains. What a fool our president is proving himself to be.
@DeepSouth16 I would also say as a resident of the neighboring country, I'd rather your poor didn't become the next boat people to Canada, looking for living wages to feed their families. As a Canadian whose currency and economy are tied to our Southern neighbor's, I'd rather you didn't go bankrupt, or have your $ completely devalued. As a business owner who sells services to American clients, I'd rather you didn't go broke, and your currency wasn't worth peanuts. I speak for many worldwide.
@DeepSouth16 Oh, that Americans felt that way and didn't bomb, invade, occupy, manipulate every country in the world they wish. Oh that Americans just kept themselves to commenting on Youtube videos, about the injustices elsewhere, instead of assassinating elected leaders, murdering civilians, "shock and awe" (isn't that a synonym for terrorism: frighten a populace into submission using weapons of war?), and selling off commercial rights (as they did in Iraq) to fellow American corporations. LOL
@DeepSouth16 You're right. I'm arguing with you, so I guess I am a dipshit. I paid $24,000 in taxes yearly for about 10 yrs before having a child, and I pay $900 a year of school taxes on the building I own for the past 12 yrs. I have a child of school age for now 1 year. So, let me see, "I" am a "freeloader" who "loves anything I can get for free"? No, perhaps I think schooling is important for all. ALL. If your schools suck, I'm sorry. Most of the world has good public schools, vs Bush/tests.
and "dipshit" "very ignorant and jealous"... wtf? Nice, very good arguments. Jealous of whom? I live in Canada, your rich don't pay for me, and wouldn't, or take from me. I find it sad to see your country turn from what was a fairly egalitarian republic where all stood together for the common good, into a 3rd world backwater of rich and impoverished. Check where the US now stands in world rankings on just about any score.
@DeepSouth16 What? Did anything you say make sense? If they don't pay taxes (and most don't pay ANY taxes), how can "they pay for in taxes"?, around MOST places (ie try downtown Manhattan), all sewage treatment, water treatment etc is public, though you might pay a small user fee. Airports should be private? Who is going to pay for them for anyone but the rich? "in the constitution" means rich citizens get it free, and average ones pay? "public ed is worthless"? Try removing it and see.
@DeepSouth16 I hope that means that they won't drive on public roads, use public water and sewage systems, won't use publicly funded airports or defense systems, healthcare or anything else. If they want to keep every last penny (most of which was earned using people who could only work for them because of public resources: ever try hiring a factory full of people who have no buses, or roads to get to work? or workers without public educations? let alone tax breaks), and not contribute...
In Ron Paul's defense he believes there should be no income tax for anyone.
Income tax is slavery. The government tells you how much of your money you can have each pay check. If you do not give them your money they will take you to court. If you do not go to court they will arrest you. If you resist arrest they will beat you. If you defend yourself with a weapon against a mob of men in body armor they will kill you.
If you do pay them they use your money to murder children.
It's a no brainer. Millionaires shouldn't get a lower rate than teachers or construction workers making $50,000 a year.
Over 80% of people polled agree.
Bush tax policies have to go as we've had 10 years of this crap and it's turning America into a 3rd world country with Americans living in tents and tent cities with their kids or living in cars.
The GOP did this. We need to CHANGE their tax policies and economics. It's failed.
This is tripe - for no other reason than the lawmakers EXEMPT themselves from having to participate in these plans (!). In other words, ALL of the Democratic lawmakers who would vote YES on the bill WON'T have their taxes raised. NONE of these people pay into social security, as well. President Obama's health-care plan was SO wonderful, SO stupendous that do you know happened? Everybody who wrote the plan was EXEMPT from having to participate in this monstrosity (!) This video is absurd.
The Buffet rule is avoid taxes at all cost! Buffet chooses to take only a $100k salary to avoid income tax. Buffet chooses to reinvest dividends to avoid the tax. He does pay capitol gains on investments he is successful with of 15%. But remember we make a salary, pay income tax, save some of that money to invest. We gamble when we invest if we win and sell for a profit we pay capitol gains. If we loose we only get to write off of $3000. Obama is a fool to use Buffet as an example.
@DillonDee1 Ok there are 47 million last year who paid no federal income tax. How about them paying their fair share? Even if it is 5% or 10% they should pay something they use the highways etc...
@DeepSouth16 First off we could say the same thing about you. Secondly the "Buffett Rule" only makes the top .03 percent of Americans pay an equal amount of their income in taxes as the average person has to. You act like your income should not be taxed. During Eisenhower's presidency those at the top had to pay 91% top marginal tax rate. You are being dramatic.The policy would be fair if the more you made the higher the percent of your income you paid in taxes. You get that money from someone.
You sound like people who propped up Versailles: "I might get hired polishing the gold plating on the walls if I work my fingers to the bone to pay taxes for them to build the roads they travel in carriages on, that I walk with bare feet"
The comments here are boggling. Rich people don't cut jobs if they pay taxes on their income. They cut jobs to make bigger profits that no one in their lifetimes could spend even if they tried. Let's see. If you and twenty friends go out to the movies, you should all pay for the movies except the guy who is a millionnaire since he might use his movie money to pay you to cut the grass at his mansion? wtf???
AND - If they'd show all their jealous welfare minions - comparisons of certain people's tax filings, it would be hard for them to make their tax and spend more argument. Show us Pelosi's COMPLETE portfolio, including her HUSBANDS, and showing us KERRY'S portfolio, INCLUDING HIS WIVE'S, compared with some of the people in this stupid video. Then we'd see how Pelosi and Kerry alone could wipe out the democrat created debt in their states. well, if they wanted to be, PaTrIoTiC that is.
I wish you'd learn facts before claiming we need to tax the rich. All you who work for a living, you're saying TAX THE HELL OUT OF MY OWN BOSS so he'll have to CUT our companies size. It's the NON working, intentionally-fat-diabetic, the drug abusers, the baby making welfarians, etc., who want "those evil rich people" taxed to the point where they can't afford to employ people, or even run their biz. Go AFTER every person STILL reaping off the CORRUPT WALLSTREET - LOTS OF DEMS IN THAT CROWD?
What if you're principally opposed to the income tax because of how it's collected? Either you pay your taxes, or you go to jail. That seems like the government bullying people into paying their taxes.
@MooseOfReason I think you should also be principally opposed to laws against murder, speeding, child abuse, wife beating, etc etc... "either you abide by the laws opposing these things or you go to jail. That seems like government bullying people into not murdering, beating and speeding. Let the murders and speeders go, on principle, that it is govt bullying to prosecute them."
@artistcolor Is that a serious argument? You're comparing the government forcing people to either pay taxes or go to jail with people going to jail because they murdered someone? Aside from being ridiculous, that's not even a similar premise.
The government uses coercion to take your money from you. That's theft. Murderers and thieves both deserve to go to jail.
@MooseOfReason Oh, thieves: the people who make scores of millions and use all the resources paid by those who are wage earners without paying a penny? The thieves who get tax breaks and credits, who get subsidies paid from taxes without paying taxes themselves? Who use public services paid by taxes (all infrastructure, defense, safe water, highways, airports, profit off publicly educated employees etc) without paying a penny, ie taking from others more poor without paying their share?
Sheridanbucket, no one is talking about wiping out the ueber-rich, even those who hoard their cash and refuse to re-invest. We simply believe they should pay their fair share. Why do you have a problem with this? Why do you hate the middle class and the poor? You won't pay for a poor man's health care, so why are you willing to pay for Koch's? Or are you a paid astroturfer?
@gurnemanz28 "We simply believe they should pay their fair share. Why do you have a problem with this?" Actually, I agree that everyone should pay his/her "Fair Share." What value will you set the "Share" percentage at, for everyone to pay?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." So, what's the equal "Share" that sounds "Fair" to you?
btw: No H8. It's all about Needs vs. Wants. I'm painfully poor in money; but, comfortably rich in life.
The TRUTH: Millionaires are not the only, or even mostly, the ones who create jobs. There are plenty of folks who have started successful small businesses that grew big, without a million bucks. In fact, most jobs in the country are created that way. The disparity in wealth distribution in this country has about 50% of the wealth in the past year going to 0.1% of the people. NOT good.
"... The 400 highest tax payers in the nation had gross annual household incomes exceeding $87,000,000. Household incomes for this group have risen more dramatically than for any other. As a result the gap between those who make less than one and half million dollars annually (99.9% of households) and those who make more (0.1%) has been steadily increasing... indeed the income disparities within the top 1.5% are quite drastic...."
Gullible? What was the tax rate during the Clinton Administration, and how did the economy do then? FU Ronald Ernest Let them die Paul sycophant. Seriously, FU.
When you raise taxes on the rich, it inevitably leads to higher taxes on everyone else. This is historic fact. And the rich have the means to leave the country. Do you? Where are the rich Democrats? There's tons of them, but they're not mentioned. Is that because they want their income tax raised? How bout this...let's get rid of income tax altogether, thus preventing the thievery and mischief of the US Government and replace it with a moral consumption tax. Simple.
When you raise taxes on the rich, it inevitably leads to higher taxes on everyone else. This is historic fact. And the rich have the means to leave the country. Do you? Where are the rich Democrats? There's tons of them, but they're not mentioned. Is that because they want their income tax raised? How bout this...let's get rid of income tax altogether, thus preventing the thievery and mischief of the US Government and replace it with a moral consumption tax. Simple.
Funny, FACTUALLY the Democrats are FAR wealthier members of CONgress. Yet these propagandist douchebags put Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul in the same category w/political HACK douchebags who've NEVER worked an honest day in their lives like Mitchell, Paul Ryan & Boehner?
FU, WallSt.Bankster SYCOPHANTS!
Are liberals this gullible now?
Just another in a long line of Soros-funded op: he financed color-revolution coups worldwide for the CIA as a beta-test in 90's, now he's wants the biggest prize: USA.
Ok all you repugs our there who have no clue as to the good this will do to help our country to get out of debt by having the millionaires pay their fair share of the taxes they should be paying are living in some kind of fairyland. It is class warfare when the rich always want to take our money and give nothing back except a hard time. It is the right way to help our country to create the jibs we need to rebuild our infrastructure and keep the poor fed. It has nothing to do with slaves and gol
AgendaPrj? NO SH*T, it's the WallSt.Banksters' controlled-opposition agenda astroturfing as grassroots!
A-holes like GWB,Buffet & Soros DON'T PAY 'income tax' in the way u or I would. As 'share OWNERS' of their companies, THEY decide which tax bracket they belong to; so they choose the $30k range. Even w/'capital gains tax can be delayed INDEFINITELY via "CharitableTrustFunds!" Google it!
Just whoTF do u bozos delude writes legislations? ACORN organizers? Or lobbyist/PAC/thinktank douchebags?
@RosenKrantz666 You know what, I am Canadian, and you just sound like some fanatic garbledegooky spouting nonsense. Really you do. If someone takes home $87,000,000 a year and cannot pay a cent towards his country's defense, infrastructure, education, and health, he is such a poor money manager he should have it ALL taken away. Really, if he paid ONE % it would be $870,000 tax. ONE percent. He would be left with 99%=$86.13 MILLION earnings. I earn $24,000 I pay $8000 tax (30%)=$16,000 to live on
I want our millionaires and corporations paying less in tax than our competitor nations' millionaires and corporations.
But no, the idea here is to turn the guns on our own people by making you envious, making you hate. It's called class warfare, just one of the many logic-free emotional pleas to justify more government control of your life.
Free people ponder why others choose to come under the influence of dictatorship. It's from propaganda like this. Some people buy into it.
@XKG80 Our competitors have their people barefoot in slums dying of cholera. They have homeless uneducated bloatbellied children wandering the streets. Most American millionaires and corporations either don't pay taxes already, or get bailouts. How are you going to do better than giving them bailouts? You're right, let's compete with Malaysia, Thailand, etc. Hope you don't like heating.
@artistcolor I hear what you're saying, but business will continue to flee the U.S. if we keep this up. We have to give some incentives to keep them here. It doesn't have to be so extreme as to put us with no heat as you're saying, but something to keep them here.
If the govt spent $ more efficiently, we wouldn't need to raise the tax so much. Totally against the "deductions" and bailouts by the way. All that does is entrench big business, no matter how crappy and overpriced their products are.
@XKG80 Fact= Businesess move their operations overseas, to take advantage of cheap labor and low environmental standards. The tax rate is the lowest it has been in 50 years. When a corporation puts profits before people, that should be taxed up the ass!
@renijohn012270 Your fact is correct so the idea is to give some incentive business to choose America or other nations.
Lowest in 50 years for America, maybe, but that's irrelevant right now. A lot of things change in 50 years. The fact is it's still among the highest in the world, and we're obviously not competing v well. Many of them pay tax at federal and state levels and are subject to double taxation. And like I said, if govt didn't waste so much, we could lower it.
@XKG80 Um, let's see, America over other nations? Did you forget there is minimum wage here? Other countries have no problem paying employees $2 and hour, so how can the American worker compete with this fact? I pay STATE & FEDERAL, so what's your point? This is not about taxes, this is about cheap labor and no regulation concerning environmental standards. Corporations already figured out their bottom line and that is,,profits are more important than doing the right thing.
@renijohn012270 Well, some countries are not total consumer market economies like the US. In some countries, $10/day is a liveable wage. You can't compare, for example, Nicaragua to the US. But that's another discussion.
You pay state and federal so what's my point? What's YOUR point? Corporations aren't stupid and will leave if they're overtaxed. You say they're not overtaxed, but what do you know? They're leaving in droves.
Keep it up and you'll have no jobs. It's that simple.
@XKG80 You make SOME valid points which I agree with, however, corporations are not going to Nicaragua, they are going to Asia, where people are willing to do slave labor for a couple dollars an hour. My point about State & Federal is that,,,why the hell should a corporation pay less in taxes than I? This is the whole debate we are having now. The rich pay less tax than everyone else, and people like you want to give them MORE tax cuts. We did that for 8 years during Bush and look where we are!
@renijohn012270 I know you want to be moral, and that's great, but your analysis ignores reality. If the point is to hire the most amount of people at the highest wage to produce the best products, your way is not the way.
Not sure why you care so much about the govt getting its cut. What about the worker? What about the consumer? After all, employment contracts and purchase contracts are privately negotiated. Not supposed to have a 3rd party taking 55%.
@XKG80 If being moral in an immoral world is wrong, then I'll be wrong till the day I die! The point is, the rich and corporate elite are sitting on trillions of dollars in profits and the average working man, who gave them their trillions, are suffering without a pot to piss in. The country is in deficit because of 2 reasons. Bush never put the trillion dollar wars on the books and the corporate billionaires never paid their fair share in taxes like everyone else.
@renijohn012270 I hear you, but at some point it becomes more moral to allow for jobs.
One thing to remember: Don't think you can force corporations into paying their fair share. They won't. They never will. They'll just lobby for tons of special deductions or flee to another country. Raise the tax all you want, they'll buy those deductions. If they can't buy 'em, they'll flee to China.
Not many corporations are willing to be a pet of the govt, esp a corrupt govt. You mentioned the wars.
@renijohn012270 Corps are set up for profits, yes. They enter into mutually beneficial contracts with each consumer for a good or service. I guess I don't view it as immoral to make profit because both sides are profiting--one party trades for goods/services they need, and other party trades its dollars.
If a corp rips people off or sells a crappy good/service, they go out of business. Until a corrupt govt to which you want to give more in tax $ bails them out.
@renijohn012270 And when you raise the tax, you open the door to loopholes, and the privileged & politically well-connected are the only ones left standing. G.E., anyone?
At the time of greatest wealth in America, it was also the time of greatest shared wealth. That's because unions were stronger and taxes on the rich were much higher. The tax money from the ri
OMG Ron Paul supporter are gonna rage any time now xD
Gabbsmo 3 months ago
the only way millionaires got their wealth is through these corrupt systems - don't give government yoru tax dollars - put your money where your mouth is and HAND out money to those will to start new business - now WAR business but rather free energy - improved health care - get ride of pills and stop causes - government just gives money to bankers - so your tax dollars are just going to the rich and not the 99% - be smart with your money
Judy101101 4 months ago
Hey guys who agree with this video. Do some research on economics for a change! I know it hurts your brain but give it a try! (srs.)
SMWhit3out 5 months ago
@SMWhit3out Ask yourself what those tax cuts have done for this country the last 8+ years. Answer: not a damn thing except increase the deficit. Republicans and their supporters can hold on to that "low taxes and deregulation creates jobs" bullshit myth but we've seen otherwise. The rich are pocketing that money, slashing jobs and laughing at you idiots. 8 years is long enough for this failed experiment. I say fuck'em and go back to the old tax rates when this country was actually stable.
BrutallyH0nest 5 months ago
@BrutallyH0nest You know why it doesn't work? and the reason why we are so fucked? Because both party's got what they wanted at the same time. That is the Worst case scenario. Democratic spending in the white house on bullshit minimum wage, obamacare, union support(killing america), endless small business regulations, failed social security and failed government subsidies. Paired with Republican Military industrial complex spending, no Gold standard, and no attempt to decrease a large government
SMWhit3out 5 months ago
@SMWhit3out
Obamacare? What a fascinating adoption of the corporate elite term used to refer to public healthcare. I believe a Fox memo actually advised their shills not to use the term because it had overwhelming support from the public that would benefit from it? You know, the public that has a life expectancy equivalent to Cuba, a country with 1/14th of the healthcare expenditure per capita? In a country alone in the industrial world with its advocacy of private healthcare?
gamerunknown 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@gamerunknown People in America behave badly. They dont exercise, eat fattening foods.and too much of them. The consequences of these behaviors have bad consequences, that have nothing at all to do with health care. These behaviors also lead to lots of expensive care. The way to judge quality, is with survival rates OF those with specific problems, the availability of care.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
This is the fundamental attribution error at play. We shouldn't blame these problems on bad behaviours, we look at the epidemiology of what causes obesity. If I had to guess: it's best covered by the "irrational actor theory": that is, people respond to corporate propaganda that promotes sedentary behaviour (fast food, TV, cars) and has inadequate social programs to combat them. Similar in UK: 65%~ adult pop overweight to obese vs. US 68%~, yet better health outcomes.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Bull. Among men, in the US diagnosed with cancer, 62.9% live another 5 years, in the UK only 44.8% do. With women in the US, 66.3% live, and in UK 52.7% do. 44% of Americans who could benefit from statins take them, while UK folks are only 23%. Over 50% of entire worlds new drugs developed in US last 20yrs. The US has more than double the CAT scanners, MRI machines per capita as UK does, etc.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
and yet there is no epidemiological effect on the population as a whole. Care to explain that?
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown "U.S. obesity rate will rise from 32 percent", " U.K. obesity rate will rise from 26 percent". "Report noted 1 % population-wide decrease in body-mass index (just 1.9 pounds for an average 198-pound adult) would prevent more than 2 million cases of diabetes, roughly 1.5 million cases of heart disease and stroke, and 73,000 to 127,000 cancer cases in US." US has more obesity, and a LITTLE screws up MANY, costing money. Thats why.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Not to mention, the US is higher in terms of infant mortality. While there may be a tenuous connection between obesity and infant mortality, the US has 33% obese women to the UK's 24%. Chen showed using 1988 data that obese women were 33% more likely to deliver a dead baby, so to account for obesity one would predict a roughly 4% increase in rates of infant mortality. Instead we see a 77% increase over the UK according to the CIA factbook.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown With the same study, infant mortality rates in the US reflect the fact they have far more high tech procedures to keep, and try to save the early pregnancies, and many other nations do not take premature births into account. However, dont you think inner city drug addicts who never get care because they are too lazy and stupid to use MediCare have an effect? I never have been to the UK, but I always felt they were more civilized than South Central Los Angeles,
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Just world hypothesis there (this system rewards diligence, the lazy and stupid die). I can't find any evidence that there's a different medical cut off point for resuscitation attempts in the US - very few babies survive from 22-24 weeks, which is the cut off point for abortions in the UK and resuscitation attempts in the US, so presumably both attempt to save children born at that point.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown OMG, Its reporting, not cut off dates. RACE "National Center for Health Stats,1997,mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) for infants born to black mothers was 13.7 compared to 8.7 for American Indians, 7.9 for Puerto Ricans, 6.0 for WHITES.".Any WHITES in UK, genius? "Income, education: Infants born to low-income mothers who did not finish high school were about 50% more likely to die than infants whose mothers finished college". Study RESULTS from TREATING disease.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Excellent, but there's an extraneous variable: non-whites are more likely to be working class. So all you've done is demonstrate that healthcare in the US discriminates against the working class, who are more likely to die under it (read my quote on Lee Atwater's dog whistle below). Why would any of them (Sowell) support such a system? Because they've been indoctrinated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, among others. You said they "save early preg" btw - cut off.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Non whites more likely, on a % basis to be wards of the State. Except for the illegal aliens, who have the very highest employment rates, higher than everyone, including whites. They come here with nothing, no English, no education, just a T-shirt, baseball cap, and a pair of jeans, and in no time at all are driving SUV`s and pickups, BBQ`ing on weekends, and nailing broads. Why? Govt doesnt give them shit, so they work.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
They're wards of the state because they have higher rates of unemployment. Take from that what you will, the Irish had higher rates of unemployment when they were recent immigrants and when employment rates picked up there was a myth that they were stealing jobs. If one wants to learn a language, one immerses oneself. They have no other places to work because NAFTA means they can't compete with subsidised American goods.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Who are "they"? Certainly not illegals. My point, maybe I failed to really make it well, is that Americans who are poor, do so voluntarily. Illegals find work easily, and when you get a crap job, you change it later for a little better crap job. Eventually, you climb out of the crap, unless the govt gives you a handout, when you just say fuck it, I`ll watch Oprah and roll another joint. Besides, poor in America already HAVE goverment insurance, MediCaid.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Wards of the state - ethnic minorities. Changing crap jobs for better jobs: not true, funny Austrian school myth. Wages are the minimum the employers can give them - working several jobs just in order to subsist under a form of wage slavery.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown I hired illegal aliens for 3 decades. They cross the borger, and within 4 months are making $5 or $600 a week, and in 3 or 4 years making $8 or $900 a week. All coming with NO English, 5th grade educations, and just the clothes they have on. Meanwhile, I am supposed to believe that inner city minorities cant find a job in 3 generations! That MILLIONS of Americans NEED 99 weeks unemployment, at the same time 12 million illegals are here, without unemployment, welfare?
luvcheney1 1 month ago
Comment removed
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Reported to USCIS, enjoy your ban.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Fed I-9 Form, where employer signs, "I attest, under penalty of perjury, that I have examined the document(s) presented by the above named employee, that the above named document(s) appear to be genuine, and relate to the employee named". There also are WARNINGS not to discriminate! NO legal REQUIREMENT to E-Verify, either! Twice, I HAD Immigration check businesses I ran, and had to fire 6 or so people whose documents appeared real. No fine, no nothing. NO LAW BROKEN.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Also, 49% of illegal immigrants have not completed high school education according to a Pew Report and they in general have a lower wage than native workers. They are useful to the employer because they can be exploited more readily (no healthcare, no employment tribunals): the same reason children had higher rates of employment before the factory act. Not to mention the fact that they support a redundant population by way of remittance.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Ultimately, the person owning the means of production and those charging rent or interest will accumulate the greater part of the profits by utilising the surplus value of another's labour. A marginal increase in wages means nothing when the purchasing power of the bottom 20% and middle 20% has remained stable since the '70s (increased financialisation of the economy) and the top 1% has shot up drastically.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown In 70`s, top personal tax rate higher than corp tax rate. When top personal rate lowered, it was good tax wise, to move CEO & Exec rewards from corp taxed basis, to personal tax basis. This increased Adj Gross Income, without actual increases. IRA`s, 401k`s have limits, reduce AGI of middle class far more than wealthy. Earned income credit, child tax credits, INCREASED income of low incomes, AFTER AGI is already calculated. Inequality far overstated, from tax changes
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
With no recompense in PPP for bottom or middle 20%.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown During Clinton Admin, Federal Reserve noted the rich spent 88% of income, saved 12%. During Bush, the rich spent more than incomes, actually spending all, and taking on debt. It is absurd to believe that this spending didnt go into anyone elses hands. Fed also notes over half of bottom 20% moved into higher quintile in 9 yrs. Also, 12 million illegals work and live, without welfare, unemployment, food stamps, they have no SS #`s. Plenty of opportunities here.
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
How was rich defined? The accumulation trends towards a smaller number of people controlling a greater proportion of resources (trickle up theory), average labour has increased in the US with no increase in actual wages (adjusting for inflation). 95% of "money" in the United States is in the form of promises to pay: even if we ignore the problems of fiat currency, that's an incredible ratio (see Money as Debt for more info).
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown Top 5%. "Rich Americans Save Tax Cuts Instead of Spending". Bloomberg, Timothy R. Homan" Moodys sifted govt, & Fed data. Title says rich SAVE tax cuts, implying something far different than facts in article, "saving rate fell from 12.1 percent in the second quarter to 9.5 percent in the 1st quarter 1994" Rich SPENT balance, 88% or MORE! "June 2001"..."savings climbed to 2.8 % first quarter 2002 from minus 2% 2nd quarter 2001" So spent MORE than earned, or ONLY 97%
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Cui bono? No commesurate increase in quality of life of population. No decrease in debt for the population. To whom do they owe money? Themselves, or more accurately, those lending money. Those that control debt control those that control the means of production that in turn control those running capitalist think tanks which in turn dictate acceptable public policy and the range of opinions seen in corporate media.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown 1) Govt has a monopoly over money. 2) Congress created the Central Bank, the Fed 3) The Fed pushes interest rates low. Low rates discourage savings (low returns), encourage debt ( easy payments) 4) Tax rewards for mortgage debt 5) penalty taxation on savings/ investment earnings 5) personal failure rewarded by safety net 6) personal success penalized progressive taxes. ANY wonder perverse incentives such as these punishing good behavior, rewarding bad FAILS?
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Government does not have a monopoly over money, that's an absurd statement. The government is in debt... How would that be possible if they were pulling the strings? Many politicians become millionaires, but that's usually by pandering to those that control either the means of production or the debt creators. The safety net is necessary as industries collapse naturally: did you even bother to read Hazlitt? Progressive taxation doesn't fail, Scandi countries > US.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown Govts all over the world have a monopoly on money. They decree, by law or fiat, that we accept their currencies. Do we have other options? I reread Economics in One Lesson again, a month ago. Our safety net is too big. 12 million illegals living here, working, without safety nets. Does it make sense to pay Americans NOT to work, attracting illegals here to work? Much of income inequality is false, due to tax changes. Much of truth due to govts perverse incentives
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
They don't, because the majority of purchases on any given Sunday are made with debt. Full employment was decried by Milton Friedman and dismissed as impossible by Marx: an industrial reserve army must be maintained. How best to maintain it? Ideally in a Capitalist system by forcing them to rely on parish charity (alms of fellow working class) to increase dissension. In a Communist system, pay them to work semi-productively. 1% income always increases.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown Please direct me to the free market currency in use. Please direct me to where I can get loans, in this free market currency. You do realize ( guess not really) that debt is expressed in terms of the currency?
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Debt is a promise to pay, the valorisation into currency, capital or other resources does not matter. It's as illusory as claiming that fiat currency is a representation of an aliquot amount of gold. The important issues are labour and relations between means of production.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown Debt is a promise to pay WHAT? Dollars. Who creates dollars?
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Debt is a promise to pay dollars which are a promise from the federal to pay an aliquot amount of gold which is the valorisation of labour in commodity form. However, banks do not have to have a reserve of physical dollars in order to create a balance for an individual and that's where the 19:1 ratio comes from.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown There is NO Federal promise to pay gold on dollars. To people, this was changed in 1933, and for foreign central banks, the Fed Reserve stopped officially in 1971. It is really not possible to have a coherent conversation with you, unless you began to say something, on occasion at least, that isnt bullshit.
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Well, educate yourself before making nonsense claims about how the government controls currency.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown I said, "They decree, by law or fiat, that we accept their currencies.". That means, they create the money, force us by law to accept it for all debts, "Fiat". They can just print it, and buy Treasury bonds, enabling Govt to spend, and devalue our work, and savings. We are deprived of commodity based currencies, govt, or private. THAT is a great degree of control, over us. That doesnt mean they control all dollars, they control creation of dollars, and its nature.
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Sorry for the rude response earlier, I was a little drunk and belligerent.I agree that fiat currency is flawed and that a post-monetary economy would be ideal, but I think there's a bigger problem: the majority of "wealth" is in the form of promises to pay. Banks can create balances without having even fiat currency, let alone gold.
gamerunknown 2 weeks ago
@gamerunknown "Post monetary economy"? Go back to drinking, you are better at that than spouting BS.
luvcheney1 2 weeks ago
@luvcheney1
Ever heard of Open Source? The protocols for the internet were developed in universities using government grants, then surrendered to private companies.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown Am I to be amazed if Govt takes money the private sector created that nothing will ever come of it? If I rob you, steal $100 from you, am I to point proudly to the single mother with a baby I helped out, by getting a lap dance at the strip club? Did the govt really turn the internet into the money making, job and wealth creating agent it is? Even if you say yes, I wonder if Govt let us keep the $2.5 Tillion its taxing away, cant something helpful come from it?
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
"Job creators" is a myth perpetuated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The reality is that they are a redundant population attenuated by the surplus labour of workers, subservient only to their shareholders that perpetuate the ideology despite their impoverishment.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown I think we are better off when we can build cars in a modern factory, as opposed to banging on metal with hammers, or farming with a tractor, on irrigated land, instead of using a hoe and praying for rain. One requires a good dose of capital, the other not so much. Of course, lots of folks think capital isnt necessary. Good luck with the hoe. Or, you could use a tree branch. Labor + Capital is better than Labor alone. This awful concept is about "productivity".
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
Sorry, you're confusing Ludditism with worker control of the means of production. The first revolution attacks the means of production rather than the social relation to it.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown I assume you desire confiscating "the means of production", not purchasing it? If so, you must live with the fact nobody will lend, or invest new capital with you. You will also have to limit wages of workers, to competitive world levels, pay Mgt to competitive world levels, in order to create your own capital, to keep up with the innovation in the world, or your worker corp will get crushed. You also will need to pay high rates to the creative, or they flee.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
The principle of remuneration isn't practiced anywhere in the world and it's a principle that doesn't necessarily hold: Linus Torvalds, RoyZimmerman, Costa Gavras, all provide their work for free. Confiscation of the means of production isn't necessary if the concept of property is abolished, or at any rate granted less rights than people.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown I think you meant, "is`nt practiced EVERYWHERE". I do actually believe there are people getting paid in the world. Apart from the obvious, my point was that your utopia couldnt be instantly instituted world world, and unless your worker owned (confiscated) corp was competitive with the rest of us evil capitalists, you would live in poverty. To compete, you would need to create capital.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
Wrong, the valorisation of labour is not equivalent to the creation of capital. Capital is the surplus labour delivered as a gift to a redundant population. Individuals in East India subsisted on a form of saag that took 12 hours of labour to produce in a week. Were they living in poverty before their existence was subsumed by capitalist production?
Wage labour is not equivalent to remuneration, people do not receive the valorisation of their labour.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown Nor do they deserve it. If you think just because some dolt works in a factory somewhere that he and all his buddies on a line deserve it all, and the man who built the factory is redundant, you are a silly, ungrateful idiot.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
If you think that the individuals that built and designed the factory (or even the designs of the products of the staff's labour) receive remuneration in proportion to their contributions, you're completely mistaken. Constant capital is one of the outlays of production and encompasses the means of production, variable capital is another, but variable capital never accomplishes full remuneration, it always sustains the redundant population.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown If this is true, nothing stops workers from building their own factory, designing their own products, hiring individuals capable of it. They can work, save & use their own capital, or, with their skills, intellect, attract venture capital. When enough intellect is present, this is quite possible. But thats not what you have in mind. You want other folks intellect and capital. My back is wrecked, I`m older, I cant work as young do. I have intellect, and saved capital.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
No, I'm afraid it's not, because the redundant population vehemently oppose such a concept and they control the parameters of debate and instil the sense of supremacy of property in the next generation. The last time such audacity was attempted was in Catalonia in Spain in the 1930s.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown The market capitalization of Apple computers is greater than that of Exxon Mobil, and it is a very new corp, relative to Exxon being a leftover from the Standard Oil of Rockeffeller. Guys like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates in half a lifetime turning the world upside down, creating enormous amounts of wealth. In my world, my parents werent rich, 4 yrs ago we inherit $40K each, but my brother and i are millionaires, he about $10 mill, I liked parties, girls, so not yet $2.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
@luvcheney1
You're mistaken as to what wealth is: neither the Austrian nor the Marxist school supports such statements. If currency were wealth, then the government could simply print as much of it was necessary for everyone to be millionaires, like in Zimbabwe. Wealth is really the valorisation of labour: you have been adept at extracting other's surplus labour, individuals like Jobs even more so.
gamerunknown 1 week ago
@gamerunknown When someone owns shares in a corp, real estate, a business, it is normal and common to express them in terms of currency, that doesnt make them currency. I agree with you, and know Adam Smith believed that gold (money) in a treasury was not the measure of a nation`s wealth. But, you are just being an ass.
luvcheney1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gamerunknown Post 2) Illegals are LEGAL to hire, when documents appear GENUINE. Min wage MAY be impossible to live on, but $300/ week is average unemployment check, and millions and millions of Americans choose it, over work. The problem is though, that low paying jobs can turn into higher paying ones. No sane person will go to work for $400 a week, if he gets $300 a week for nothing. When he pays taxes, gasoline, food out of home, its working for nothing
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Back on the healthcare issue: after removing the appalling Soviet government (left libertarians are not fans of the USSR any more than right libertarians), there was an unintended consequence: the system of healthcare essentially collapsed and it's only beginning to pick up with Putin's reforms (not that I'm any more a fan of Putin). You can look at the average lifespan charts on wiki for verification.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Post 2) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
explains, “It is difficult to estimate the relative contribution of the numerous nonmedical
and medical factors that might affect variations in life expectancy across countries
and over time.” "Consider the nearly three year disparity in life expectancy between
Utah (78.7 years) and Nevada (75.9 years)"
despite the fact that the two states have
essentially the same health care systems.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1
Variation can mean that the Nevadan population is less well off under exclusively private healthcare. For example, if they have a larger rural population or if fewer of them can afford healthcare. As for whether correcting for homicides would result in the highest lifespan: I doubt it. Under 15k Americans were murdered in 2010, 616k died from coronary disease. Harvard Medical school reports 45k Americans die each year from a lack of medical insurance.
gamerunknown 1 month ago
@gamerunknown Post 3) "study by Robert Ohsfeldt and John Schneider for the American Enterprise Institute found that those exogenous factors are so distorting that if you correct for homicides and accidents, the United States rises to
the top of the list for life expectancy".
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@SMWhit3out
Unsurprising that you're a racist. To quote you commenting on another video: "fuck you nignog". Lee Atwater put it as "You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff.".
Good fight, you lose.
gamerunknown 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@BrutallyH0nest Taxing the rich is just the Tip of the iceberg of our problems. Like I said, Fucking educate your self. And you're welcome.
SMWhit3out 5 months ago
hahahaha, stupid ass video finished off with a quote from teddy. Fuck you're stupid. Enjoy running our country into the ground!
SMWhit3out 5 months ago
The new tax would be on people earning $1 million plus per year, not those whose entire value is $1 million (which is actually quite common).
owen2760 5 months ago
Greed indeed. Some are indoctrinated into it.
BigKab1 5 months ago
Im not from USA and my english is not perfect. In USA dies a lot of people because they cant get health care or they have a crapy insurance. I see a very rich first world countrie with a high mortality rate, i see this like a real big contradiction. Can anybody explain me that??
nacho2541 5 months ago
@nacho2541 It's because of greed.
perrin6 5 months ago
Jealous of what? The greedy and criminal class? They never created a decent job for their fellow Americans in ten years. Millionaires and Billionaires should be taxed and give their far share. The trickle down theory has always been a myth for 30 years now. One could wonder if that massive spending of two wars and unregulated investing placed the US into a deep eccomic abyss.
Soulthinker2007 5 months ago
When I was a kid none of my friend's mother's worked. Our dad's worked and we all lived in our own homes and we all took vacations and we were all middle class. That class is gone today. That should be the goal of these tax hikes, to make our country more like the 60's -70's when mothers could stay home and be with their children if they wanted to and people could own their homes and take vacations and have average nice lives.
Pennee101 5 months ago
@Pennee101 That's sexist. Your Father could stay home with you, while your Mother is out to work. FYI - There is still a middle class, only we do have people clean our homes now.
TheYoungTurdz 5 months ago
15.1% of all US Citizens now live in absolute POVERTY in the United States.
The highest rate of ANY industrialized country on earth.
The top 400 earners in the US now control over 50% of all wealth in the US.
Thanks, GOP
We are now going on 11 years of your Bush tax and economic policies. I'd say they have FAILED.
coltor9 5 months ago
Hey Buffet cut a fuckin' check to the Government already!
Oh yeah and why is all his money going to Bill Gates foundation when he dies? Why not give it to the US Government? Since they will spend it so much more wisely.
High5forAmerica 5 months ago
There's nothing patriotic about giving the government more money to squander.
FactChecking101 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 Yeah, cuz we all *hate* having modern infrastructure. Man, if we got rid of all those damn bridges, and dams, we'd be like....ZImbabwe.
ChollieD 5 months ago
@ChollieD Deal. We will only pay enough for infrastructure. What is that about 2% of the budget? Sounds great.
FactChecking101 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 *You* go live in one of those countries where the wealthiest 0.1% own basically everything. Like Haiti, or Gabon, or basically any place in the third world.
I'd rather live in a place where nationality means something, and where RATIONAL, ENLIGHTENED self-interest means that you want your fellow citizens to have enough so that you need not live behind razor wire to protect yours. America has the people that we have. Folks don't just go away when there's no jobs.
ChollieD 5 months ago
@ChollieD Fleece the successful to appease the lazy? Great idea.
FactChecking101 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 Yeah, the poor are all only just a bunch of "welfare queens", and the reason for the crash of 2008 was because America got lazy, and not because Wall Street mistakenly set up a casino where almost everyone was guaranteed to lose (all while having "AAA" ratings on every bet).
It's high time you graduated to Fact Checking 102. Stop being such a hater sociopath about poor people. Many of the work really hard.
ChollieD 5 months ago
@ChollieD And you want your fellow citizens to be able to afford the goods and services you produce. Wasn't that the big dream of Ford? That every Ford employee could afford a car? The US was built on helping your fellow man (oh, and exploiting slaves and the land of the people it was stolen from), but yes, revolutionary ideals NOT the ideals of the rich, the barons, the kings, the despots, working and overtaxing the landless serfs. Oh well.
artistcolor 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 I see why you are FactChecking101 and not 401 or phd. Really. That would be nice. Bridges and dams, and then refugee camps of starving sick people, beggars and thieves and cutthroats on every corner, illiterate work force lining up barefoot in the snow for jobs, if they are well enough to work.Note that most cool countries have some sort of social welfare, as most people dislike watching their neighbors and neighbors' children freeze to death...it takes warmth to live homeless.
artistcolor 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 Nothing patriotic about not pitching in to build and maintain a country you propose to be a citizen of.
artistcolor 5 months ago
The Republicans' masters are turning against them! Even they think the Republicans are doing things wrong! Its time that plutocratic party knows when to stop reducing tax cuts to the rich!
TheVoiceOfReason93 5 months ago
What makes the tax system so terribly unfair nowadays is that the middle class & poor pay a higher social security tax rate than the rich & higher federal tax rate on gasoline, cigarettes, beer, etc in addition to paying a higher overall rate on sales tax, property tax, state gasoline tax, hunting&fishing & gun&marriage & car licenses, & registrations & pernits, tolls, fines, fees, penalties, etc
By the time it's totaled many pay around 20% of income as the super rich often pay around 1%
DillonDee1 5 months ago
The man who made the mosr money last year - $15 Billion Dollars -- paid a Income tax rate of 15% & a Social Security Tax rate of less than .0000000000000000001%
My maid paid a higher tax rate.
STOP THE INSANITY!
DillonDee1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
AP| FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries?
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iP3lhS4ZQ-UhyUvFfUgdPCiu-jJA
StewartIII 5 months ago
More class warfare illusions for the weak minded. The only thing that will fix this is an overhaul of our tax system. A fair and balanced approach where NO person goes without paying their fair share of taxes. To pay nothing is anti-American. Get rid of all write offs. Make everyone pay a percentage, the same percentage.
Capital Gains tax should be abolished if you want people to invest in this country.
TheYoungTurdz 5 months ago
@TheYoungTurdz Yeah, the flat tax that you propose is also called a "regressive" tax.
People investing in this country and making a bundle on betting on our hard work (inevitably, sucking up some of the wealth that we created) can pay a share of it back to us. You're welcome for all the work we put in to make your investment a success.
ChollieD 5 months ago
@ChollieD No one owes you anything. You take the job, you know what it pays. A job is a gift and if you don't want it, go start your own business. Then you can overpay people and go bankrupt.
FactChecking101 5 months ago
@FactChecking101 "if you don't want it, go start your own business. Then you can overpay people and go bankrupt."
I don't want to get paid more, I want mid-1990's taxes on the rich. It's amusing how often Libertarian arguments end in such operatic ultimata, as if you lot haven't had a fresh or second thought since reading The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged.
Oh, and a job isn't a gift, any more than it is a right. It's a partnership between a capital owner and a person with skills to rent.
ChollieD 5 months ago
@ChollieD So 29% actual federal taxes paid should go up and 15% actual federal taxes paid by the middle class is fair?
FactChecking101 5 months ago
@ChollieD You should want to live in a fair and balanaced society. Majority of Americans aspire, then there are those that want to sit back and not contribute at all. We need everyone to have skin in the game! You should be thrilled that someone thought to invest in you, even if you won't invest in yourself.
TheYoungTurdz 5 months ago
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill
darrenlachel1 5 months ago
Associated Press Fact-Checks the "Buffett Rule":
hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TAXES_FACT_CHECK
Aeschylus 5 months ago
This entire argument about the millionaires and billionaires is BS. What the President has proposed will hurt the middle class. Everyone who has dividend or investment income will feel it. Obama is comparing Apples & Oranges. Buffet's "secretary" lol, pays the same capital gains tax as Buffet. (long term, more than one year) The stock market will sell off if he raises cap gains. What a fool our president is proving himself to be.
ladylordess 5 months ago
Comment removed
rocky19421 5 months ago
Comment removed
rocky19421 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 I would also say as a resident of the neighboring country, I'd rather your poor didn't become the next boat people to Canada, looking for living wages to feed their families. As a Canadian whose currency and economy are tied to our Southern neighbor's, I'd rather you didn't go bankrupt, or have your $ completely devalued. As a business owner who sells services to American clients, I'd rather you didn't go broke, and your currency wasn't worth peanuts. I speak for many worldwide.
artistcolor 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 Oh, that Americans felt that way and didn't bomb, invade, occupy, manipulate every country in the world they wish. Oh that Americans just kept themselves to commenting on Youtube videos, about the injustices elsewhere, instead of assassinating elected leaders, murdering civilians, "shock and awe" (isn't that a synonym for terrorism: frighten a populace into submission using weapons of war?), and selling off commercial rights (as they did in Iraq) to fellow American corporations. LOL
artistcolor 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 You're right. I'm arguing with you, so I guess I am a dipshit. I paid $24,000 in taxes yearly for about 10 yrs before having a child, and I pay $900 a year of school taxes on the building I own for the past 12 yrs. I have a child of school age for now 1 year. So, let me see, "I" am a "freeloader" who "loves anything I can get for free"? No, perhaps I think schooling is important for all. ALL. If your schools suck, I'm sorry. Most of the world has good public schools, vs Bush/tests.
artistcolor 5 months ago
and "dipshit" "very ignorant and jealous"... wtf? Nice, very good arguments. Jealous of whom? I live in Canada, your rich don't pay for me, and wouldn't, or take from me. I find it sad to see your country turn from what was a fairly egalitarian republic where all stood together for the common good, into a 3rd world backwater of rich and impoverished. Check where the US now stands in world rankings on just about any score.
artistcolor 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 What? Did anything you say make sense? If they don't pay taxes (and most don't pay ANY taxes), how can "they pay for in taxes"?, around MOST places (ie try downtown Manhattan), all sewage treatment, water treatment etc is public, though you might pay a small user fee. Airports should be private? Who is going to pay for them for anyone but the rich? "in the constitution" means rich citizens get it free, and average ones pay? "public ed is worthless"? Try removing it and see.
artistcolor 5 months ago
why isnt Pelosi in there? Hmmmm
Panchee123 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 I hope that means that they won't drive on public roads, use public water and sewage systems, won't use publicly funded airports or defense systems, healthcare or anything else. If they want to keep every last penny (most of which was earned using people who could only work for them because of public resources: ever try hiring a factory full of people who have no buses, or roads to get to work? or workers without public educations? let alone tax breaks), and not contribute...
artistcolor 5 months ago
In Ron Paul's defense he believes there should be no income tax for anyone.
Income tax is slavery. The government tells you how much of your money you can have each pay check. If you do not give them your money they will take you to court. If you do not go to court they will arrest you. If you resist arrest they will beat you. If you defend yourself with a weapon against a mob of men in body armor they will kill you.
If you do pay them they use your money to murder children.
All facts
st4ticblu3 5 months ago
@st4ticblu3 What koolaid do you drink?
artistcolor 5 months ago
@st4ticblu3 "Income tax is slavery."
Bullshit. We *ought* to force you and your kids to live in actual fucking slave conditions, so that you know the difference.
Ayn Rand died friendless and alone, because it wasn't in her former colleagues' "self-interest" to stick around for the old hag once she became ill.
Wake up from that "objectivist" nonsense. It's just philosophy for sociopaths.
ChollieD 5 months ago 3
It's a no brainer. Millionaires shouldn't get a lower rate than teachers or construction workers making $50,000 a year.
Over 80% of people polled agree.
Bush tax policies have to go as we've had 10 years of this crap and it's turning America into a 3rd world country with Americans living in tents and tent cities with their kids or living in cars.
The GOP did this. We need to CHANGE their tax policies and economics. It's failed.
coltor9 5 months ago 15
@coltor9 LOOOOOOOOOOL, Hows that change coming boss?
SMWhit3out 5 months ago
@SMWhit3out How's that 3 trillion looking for those weapons of mass destruction going for ya?
coltor9 5 months ago
This is tripe - for no other reason than the lawmakers EXEMPT themselves from having to participate in these plans (!). In other words, ALL of the Democratic lawmakers who would vote YES on the bill WON'T have their taxes raised. NONE of these people pay into social security, as well. President Obama's health-care plan was SO wonderful, SO stupendous that do you know happened? Everybody who wrote the plan was EXEMPT from having to participate in this monstrosity (!) This video is absurd.
johnlorican 5 months ago
Hahaha. The 'agenda' project.
Sounds like commie tripe to me.
the82spartans 5 months ago
The Buffet rule is avoid taxes at all cost! Buffet chooses to take only a $100k salary to avoid income tax. Buffet chooses to reinvest dividends to avoid the tax. He does pay capitol gains on investments he is successful with of 15%. But remember we make a salary, pay income tax, save some of that money to invest. We gamble when we invest if we win and sell for a profit we pay capitol gains. If we loose we only get to write off of $3000. Obama is a fool to use Buffet as an example.
quizerry 5 months ago
I sometimes hear idiots say that what I earn is MY MONEY -- AS THOUGH THE GOVT HAS NO RIGHT TO ANY OF IT,
...As if highways, bridges, fire depts, police depts, schools, etc - build themselves
In a modern day society it requires abouy 30% in taxes
The problem today is that the super-rich pay about 15% - as the middle class pays 30% - THIS IS INSANE
DillonDee1 5 months ago
@DillonDee1 Ok there are 47 million last year who paid no federal income tax. How about them paying their fair share? Even if it is 5% or 10% they should pay something they use the highways etc...
quizerry 5 months ago
@DillonDee1 Dam, you are incorrect. Contact your CPA for the actual numbers. Better yet, check the NYT today!
TheYoungTurdz 5 months ago
@DeepSouth16 First off we could say the same thing about you. Secondly the "Buffett Rule" only makes the top .03 percent of Americans pay an equal amount of their income in taxes as the average person has to. You act like your income should not be taxed. During Eisenhower's presidency those at the top had to pay 91% top marginal tax rate. You are being dramatic.The policy would be fair if the more you made the higher the percent of your income you paid in taxes. You get that money from someone.
josh1492 5 months ago
You sound like people who propped up Versailles: "I might get hired polishing the gold plating on the walls if I work my fingers to the bone to pay taxes for them to build the roads they travel in carriages on, that I walk with bare feet"
artistcolor 5 months ago
The comments here are boggling. Rich people don't cut jobs if they pay taxes on their income. They cut jobs to make bigger profits that no one in their lifetimes could spend even if they tried. Let's see. If you and twenty friends go out to the movies, you should all pay for the movies except the guy who is a millionnaire since he might use his movie money to pay you to cut the grass at his mansion? wtf???
artistcolor 5 months ago
AND - If they'd show all their jealous welfare minions - comparisons of certain people's tax filings, it would be hard for them to make their tax and spend more argument. Show us Pelosi's COMPLETE portfolio, including her HUSBANDS, and showing us KERRY'S portfolio, INCLUDING HIS WIVE'S, compared with some of the people in this stupid video. Then we'd see how Pelosi and Kerry alone could wipe out the democrat created debt in their states. well, if they wanted to be, PaTrIoTiC that is.
YOURpervertexposer 5 months ago
I wish you'd learn facts before claiming we need to tax the rich. All you who work for a living, you're saying TAX THE HELL OUT OF MY OWN BOSS so he'll have to CUT our companies size. It's the NON working, intentionally-fat-diabetic, the drug abusers, the baby making welfarians, etc., who want "those evil rich people" taxed to the point where they can't afford to employ people, or even run their biz. Go AFTER every person STILL reaping off the CORRUPT WALLSTREET - LOTS OF DEMS IN THAT CROWD?
YOURpervertexposer 5 months ago
What if you're principally opposed to the income tax because of how it's collected? Either you pay your taxes, or you go to jail. That seems like the government bullying people into paying their taxes.
MooseOfReason 5 months ago
@MooseOfReason I think you should also be principally opposed to laws against murder, speeding, child abuse, wife beating, etc etc... "either you abide by the laws opposing these things or you go to jail. That seems like government bullying people into not murdering, beating and speeding. Let the murders and speeders go, on principle, that it is govt bullying to prosecute them."
artistcolor 5 months ago
@artistcolor Is that a serious argument? You're comparing the government forcing people to either pay taxes or go to jail with people going to jail because they murdered someone? Aside from being ridiculous, that's not even a similar premise.
The government uses coercion to take your money from you. That's theft. Murderers and thieves both deserve to go to jail.
MooseOfReason 5 months ago
@MooseOfReason Oh, thieves: the people who make scores of millions and use all the resources paid by those who are wage earners without paying a penny? The thieves who get tax breaks and credits, who get subsidies paid from taxes without paying taxes themselves? Who use public services paid by taxes (all infrastructure, defense, safe water, highways, airports, profit off publicly educated employees etc) without paying a penny, ie taking from others more poor without paying their share?
artistcolor 5 months ago
Doesn't Buffett's company owe a billion in back taxes? They should pay that: it would keep the federal government going for... several hours.
Aeschylus 5 months ago
Hurray for class warfare! Lenin would be proud of you guys
xoxoxo
finny6 5 months ago
Sheridanbucket, no one is talking about wiping out the ueber-rich, even those who hoard their cash and refuse to re-invest. We simply believe they should pay their fair share. Why do you have a problem with this? Why do you hate the middle class and the poor? You won't pay for a poor man's health care, so why are you willing to pay for Koch's? Or are you a paid astroturfer?
gurnemanz28 5 months ago
@gurnemanz28 "We simply believe they should pay their fair share. Why do you have a problem with this?" Actually, I agree that everyone should pay his/her "Fair Share." What value will you set the "Share" percentage at, for everyone to pay?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." So, what's the equal "Share" that sounds "Fair" to you?
btw: No H8. It's all about Needs vs. Wants. I'm painfully poor in money; but, comfortably rich in life.
sheridanbucket 5 months ago
The TRUTH: Millionaires are not the only, or even mostly, the ones who create jobs. There are plenty of folks who have started successful small businesses that grew big, without a million bucks. In fact, most jobs in the country are created that way. The disparity in wealth distribution in this country has about 50% of the wealth in the past year going to 0.1% of the people. NOT good.
UtahOwl 5 months ago
I'm pleased that such millionaires are calling out the greedy pols in protecting the Idle Class. In the GOP Greed Is Good.
Soulthinker2007 5 months ago
this is garbage, everyone knows ron paul is the only politician in congress he has never taken a pay increase and No he is not a millionaire. FAIL
ikoronduka 5 months ago
@ikoronduka news break: yes he is
ngator01 5 months ago
"... The 400 highest tax payers in the nation had gross annual household incomes exceeding $87,000,000. Household incomes for this group have risen more dramatically than for any other. As a result the gap between those who make less than one and half million dollars annually (99.9% of households) and those who make more (0.1%) has been steadily increasing... indeed the income disparities within the top 1.5% are quite drastic...."
wiki - "affluence in the United States"
aehaeha 5 months ago
Gullible? What was the tax rate during the Clinton Administration, and how did the economy do then? FU Ronald Ernest Let them die Paul sycophant. Seriously, FU.
y0us3rn4m3 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When you raise taxes on the rich, it inevitably leads to higher taxes on everyone else. This is historic fact. And the rich have the means to leave the country. Do you? Where are the rich Democrats? There's tons of them, but they're not mentioned. Is that because they want their income tax raised? How bout this...let's get rid of income tax altogether, thus preventing the thievery and mischief of the US Government and replace it with a moral consumption tax. Simple.
pavman42 5 months ago
When you raise taxes on the rich, it inevitably leads to higher taxes on everyone else. This is historic fact. And the rich have the means to leave the country. Do you? Where are the rich Democrats? There's tons of them, but they're not mentioned. Is that because they want their income tax raised? How bout this...let's get rid of income tax altogether, thus preventing the thievery and mischief of the US Government and replace it with a moral consumption tax. Simple.
pavman42 5 months ago
Funny, FACTUALLY the Democrats are FAR wealthier members of CONgress. Yet these propagandist douchebags put Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul in the same category w/political HACK douchebags who've NEVER worked an honest day in their lives like Mitchell, Paul Ryan & Boehner?
FU, WallSt.Bankster SYCOPHANTS!
Are liberals this gullible now?
Just another in a long line of Soros-funded op: he financed color-revolution coups worldwide for the CIA as a beta-test in 90's, now he's wants the biggest prize: USA.
RosenKrantz666 5 months ago
Ok all you repugs our there who have no clue as to the good this will do to help our country to get out of debt by having the millionaires pay their fair share of the taxes they should be paying are living in some kind of fairyland. It is class warfare when the rich always want to take our money and give nothing back except a hard time. It is the right way to help our country to create the jibs we need to rebuild our infrastructure and keep the poor fed. It has nothing to do with slaves and gol
jrwooton1962 5 months ago
AgendaPrj? NO SH*T, it's the WallSt.Banksters' controlled-opposition agenda astroturfing as grassroots!
A-holes like GWB,Buffet & Soros DON'T PAY 'income tax' in the way u or I would. As 'share OWNERS' of their companies, THEY decide which tax bracket they belong to; so they choose the $30k range. Even w/'capital gains tax can be delayed INDEFINITELY via "CharitableTrustFunds!" Google it!
Just whoTF do u bozos delude writes legislations? ACORN organizers? Or lobbyist/PAC/thinktank douchebags?
RosenKrantz666 5 months ago
@RosenKrantz666 You know what, I am Canadian, and you just sound like some fanatic garbledegooky spouting nonsense. Really you do. If someone takes home $87,000,000 a year and cannot pay a cent towards his country's defense, infrastructure, education, and health, he is such a poor money manager he should have it ALL taken away. Really, if he paid ONE % it would be $870,000 tax. ONE percent. He would be left with 99%=$86.13 MILLION earnings. I earn $24,000 I pay $8000 tax (30%)=$16,000 to live on
artistcolor 5 months ago
I want our millionaires and corporations paying less in tax than our competitor nations' millionaires and corporations.
But no, the idea here is to turn the guns on our own people by making you envious, making you hate. It's called class warfare, just one of the many logic-free emotional pleas to justify more government control of your life.
Free people ponder why others choose to come under the influence of dictatorship. It's from propaganda like this. Some people buy into it.
XKG80 5 months ago
@XKG80 Our competitors have their people barefoot in slums dying of cholera. They have homeless uneducated bloatbellied children wandering the streets. Most American millionaires and corporations either don't pay taxes already, or get bailouts. How are you going to do better than giving them bailouts? You're right, let's compete with Malaysia, Thailand, etc. Hope you don't like heating.
artistcolor 5 months ago
@artistcolor I hear what you're saying, but business will continue to flee the U.S. if we keep this up. We have to give some incentives to keep them here. It doesn't have to be so extreme as to put us with no heat as you're saying, but something to keep them here.
If the govt spent $ more efficiently, we wouldn't need to raise the tax so much. Totally against the "deductions" and bailouts by the way. All that does is entrench big business, no matter how crappy and overpriced their products are.
XKG80 5 months ago
@XKG80 Fact= Businesess move their operations overseas, to take advantage of cheap labor and low environmental standards. The tax rate is the lowest it has been in 50 years. When a corporation puts profits before people, that should be taxed up the ass!
renijohn012270 5 months ago
@renijohn012270 Your fact is correct so the idea is to give some incentive business to choose America or other nations.
Lowest in 50 years for America, maybe, but that's irrelevant right now. A lot of things change in 50 years. The fact is it's still among the highest in the world, and we're obviously not competing v well. Many of them pay tax at federal and state levels and are subject to double taxation. And like I said, if govt didn't waste so much, we could lower it.
XKG80 5 months ago
@XKG80 Um, let's see, America over other nations? Did you forget there is minimum wage here? Other countries have no problem paying employees $2 and hour, so how can the American worker compete with this fact? I pay STATE & FEDERAL, so what's your point? This is not about taxes, this is about cheap labor and no regulation concerning environmental standards. Corporations already figured out their bottom line and that is,,profits are more important than doing the right thing.
renijohn012270 5 months ago
@renijohn012270 Well, some countries are not total consumer market economies like the US. In some countries, $10/day is a liveable wage. You can't compare, for example, Nicaragua to the US. But that's another discussion.
You pay state and federal so what's my point? What's YOUR point? Corporations aren't stupid and will leave if they're overtaxed. You say they're not overtaxed, but what do you know? They're leaving in droves.
Keep it up and you'll have no jobs. It's that simple.
XKG80 5 months ago
@XKG80 You make SOME valid points which I agree with, however, corporations are not going to Nicaragua, they are going to Asia, where people are willing to do slave labor for a couple dollars an hour. My point about State & Federal is that,,,why the hell should a corporation pay less in taxes than I? This is the whole debate we are having now. The rich pay less tax than everyone else, and people like you want to give them MORE tax cuts. We did that for 8 years during Bush and look where we are!
renijohn012270 5 months ago
@renijohn012270 I know you want to be moral, and that's great, but your analysis ignores reality. If the point is to hire the most amount of people at the highest wage to produce the best products, your way is not the way.
Not sure why you care so much about the govt getting its cut. What about the worker? What about the consumer? After all, employment contracts and purchase contracts are privately negotiated. Not supposed to have a 3rd party taking 55%.
XKG80 5 months ago
@XKG80 If being moral in an immoral world is wrong, then I'll be wrong till the day I die! The point is, the rich and corporate elite are sitting on trillions of dollars in profits and the average working man, who gave them their trillions, are suffering without a pot to piss in. The country is in deficit because of 2 reasons. Bush never put the trillion dollar wars on the books and the corporate billionaires never paid their fair share in taxes like everyone else.
renijohn012270 5 months ago 7
@renijohn012270 I hear you, but at some point it becomes more moral to allow for jobs.
One thing to remember: Don't think you can force corporations into paying their fair share. They won't. They never will. They'll just lobby for tons of special deductions or flee to another country. Raise the tax all you want, they'll buy those deductions. If they can't buy 'em, they'll flee to China.
Not many corporations are willing to be a pet of the govt, esp a corrupt govt. You mentioned the wars.
XKG80 5 months ago
@renijohn012270 Corps are set up for profits, yes. They enter into mutually beneficial contracts with each consumer for a good or service. I guess I don't view it as immoral to make profit because both sides are profiting--one party trades for goods/services they need, and other party trades its dollars.
If a corp rips people off or sells a crappy good/service, they go out of business. Until a corrupt govt to which you want to give more in tax $ bails them out.
XKG80 5 months ago
@renijohn012270 And when you raise the tax, you open the door to loopholes, and the privileged & politically well-connected are the only ones left standing. G.E., anyone?
XKG80 5 months ago
At the time of greatest wealth in America, it was also the time of greatest shared wealth. That's because unions were stronger and taxes on the rich were much higher. The tax money from the ri