PDA

View Full Version : Double the tax rate on the rich?




AuH20
04-11-2009, 08:23 PM
Coldblooded collectivists. Thats what we're pitted against. They want to keep feeding the beast.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/11/719124/-Should-We-Double-the-Tax-Rate-on-the-Rich

heavenlyboy34
04-11-2009, 08:35 PM
Coldblooded collectivists. Thats what we're pitted against. They want to keep feeding the beast.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/11/719124/-Should-We-Double-the-Tax-Rate-on-the-Rich

Typical of the "irrational/looney left", they miss the point and go for a strawman. :(:p

JdotRdot
04-11-2009, 08:39 PM
raise the tax on the CEOs & other managers/administrators that don't have stake in the company...or at least let us beat them with sticks when they bankrupt us:D

AuH20
04-11-2009, 08:46 PM
Typical of the "irrational/looney left", they miss the point and go for a strawman. :(:p

This is the lunacy we're dealing with. Its called "class warfare" hypnosis, courtesy of a Kos member:


The US cut rates below that in the 20's and we almost immediately caused the great depression from the casino economy that resulted from the rapid influx of money into the top.

We did it again in the 80's but with so much New Deal regulation, it took 15 years or so for the rich to first buy off government to repeal enough of that regulation to once again set up the casino economy and throw us into something close to a global depression.

Our top rate is 35% or so which is clearly WAY too low. Europe's at around 50% and that's clearly too low since they ended up running enough of the same casino nonsense that they're much of the same trouble we are.

Almost all the legal and illegal sociopathic business behavior we've been talking about has been driven by the ability to earn half a billion and more in short term schemes that may blow up the company long term.

If we return to the proven safety of New Deal progressive taxation, the incentive for countless such schemes goes away, because nobody can keep more than a few million a year. And safe responsible business practice can create those kinds of incomes.


We can let people get rich. But we've shown numerous times and places that there is such a thing as too rich too fast. It's a bedrock security issue.


The Fed caused these problems with excess liquidity, yet this poster blames the low taxation rate for the bubble bursts!!! :D All civilizations have had some rich citizens who attained their fortunes through unscrupulous methods, but to declare war on the more industrious and disciplined of society is madness.

AuH20
04-11-2009, 08:53 PM
More insanity. Goddamn Fabian socialist scum:


I think it would be a severe shock to implement a huge increase, but this can be phased in over 10 years, easily.

The rest of the Western nations must cooperate to make this work, or else we will have the unpatriotic bastard rich leave our country in droves [and they most CERTAINLY will do so, too if there is a big disparity between tax rates].

No more secret bank accounts. No more island nations that act as tax havens.

silverhawks
04-11-2009, 08:59 PM
Learning more and more each day why they are known as the "loony" left.

This is insane. All its going to do is drive countries who sign onto this policy towards depression as the rich pull their investments out and bail...people will literally go Galt.

Though I must say, this is right in line with the M.O. of the politicians that are driving this wave of social change - they like to swiftly throw the people who get them to where they need to go under the bus.

satchelmcqueen
04-12-2009, 07:11 PM
even if i agreed that raising taxes on the rich was a good thing (which i dont), do people not realize that when the gov suggests this or anyone else, that what it really means is that the government will just get more money anyway?? of course the gov will go that route in a sheeps clothing.


sort of like the whole windfall tax they tried to push on the oil companies, to help get back at them and protect the little guy. well, who winds up with that windfall tax?? the government.