TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ove ... 49589.html

100 million dead beats in America, at just the Federal level, and it's only going to get worse with Obamacare. This is simply economically unsustainable.

I got into a discussion with a guy on FB through the page of an old squadron mate of mine; I believe it was one of his relatives...anyway, my old buddy posted an article about Michelle O. saying that if we just spend money at our local restaurants, the economy will get fixed (simplified, but still the gist of it). Anyway, the conversation turned to steel of all things...and this relative of my old buddy said basically that the "fat cats make too much and they need to be taxed more"...I tried my best to make him understand that if the conditions here aren't right, including a low enough tax rate, then there is no way that Americans are going to open more businesses here in this country, but he just didn't get it...just like the French with their 75% tax rate that is looming...I'm going to guess that there will be some new residents of London pretty soon...the Brits are bad, but not 75% bad...and how about us here in the USA? What about when the levels of taxes proposed by the Community-Organizer-in-Chief and his Democrat Socialist Party cronies don't fix the economy? What then? Do the levels just keep going up...until they hit 75%...or HIGHER? Will THAT fix the problems? Anyone who thinks that it will is simply thick in the head...

Heartland Patriot wrote:I got into a discussion with a guy on FB through the page of an old squadron mate of mine; I believe it was one of his relatives...anyway, my old buddy posted an article about Michelle O. saying that if we just spend money at our local restaurants, the economy will get fixed (simplified, but still the gist of it). Anyway, the conversation turned to steel of all things...and this relative of my old buddy said basically that the "fat cats make too much and they need to be taxed more"...I tried my best to make him understand that if the conditions here aren't right, including a low enough tax rate, then there is no way that Americans are going to open more businesses here in this country, but he just didn't get it...just like the French with their 75% tax rate that is looming...I'm going to guess that there will be some new residents of London pretty soon...the Brits are bad, but not 75% bad...and how about us here in the USA? What about when the levels of taxes proposed by the Community-Organizer-in-Chief and his Democrat Socialist Party cronies don't fix the economy? What then? Do the levels just keep going up...until they hit 75%...or HIGHER? Will THAT fix the problems? Anyone who thinks that it will is simply thick in the head...

Just remember, in America, "rich" means someone who makes a dollar more than "you" do. Were there no "fat cats" in the Soviet Union? Are there no "fat cats" in communist China? People like you describe aren't thinkers, they're ruled by their emotions. What would this relative do if he got a 10% raise and it put him into a 50% tax bracket, so his take home would be roughly 40% less than before he got a raise? Happily pay his taxes, or tell his employer he'll skip the raise? Without even considering the morality of the tax system, in practice, people will act to maximize their income, so to escape the tax they will either produce less, hide their income, or employ their money where the tax bite is less. On the moral side of the question, why should I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than anyone else? If everyone is taxed at, say, 10%, then I pay twice as much tax as the guy who makes half as much as I do. Socialism exploits envy until everyone is reduced to the lowest common denominator --every one that is except the people in power and their cronies.

Wealth is not finite. Anybody that whines about "rich people need to be taxed more to make things fair" has absolutely no grasp of economics or of how wealth is created. I don't waste my brain cells on them. POTUS included.

I get your point but you should get a new example. That is not how tax brackets work. His take-home pay will not be less than before. It won't be 10% higher either.

3dfxMM wrote:I get your point but you should get a new example. That is not how tax brackets work. His take-home pay will not be less than before. It won't be 10% higher either.

Yes, it's an extreme example, not realistic, merely to illustrate a point that at a certain level of taxation, people will simply cease additional production.

Most people do not understand how simple economics work, you tax the rich more they pass it back on to the consumer in higher prices. The rich are that way because they will get their bottom line no matter what. It has always been that way. My boss owns I believe now just under 200 trucks. When expenses go up on him, he will do what ever it takes to make sure his profit margin stays the same. It is a fact of life. Most just don't understand.

In reality, every dollar of public-sector spending on stimulus simply wiped out a dollar of private investment and output, resulting in an overall decline in GDP. This is an even more astonishing result because government spending is counted in official GDP numbers. In other words, the spending was more like a valium for lethargic economies than a stimulant.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087 ... 85010.html

txhighlander wrote:Most people do not understand how simple economics work, you tax the rich more they pass it back on to the consumer in higher prices. The rich are that way because they will get their bottom line no matter what. It has always been that way. My boss owns I believe now just under 200 trucks. When expenses go up on him, he will do what ever it takes to make sure his profit margin stays the same. It is a fact of life. Most just don't understand.

I tried to tell the guy on FB that business aren't there because of altruism...but he just didn't seem to get it.

emcee rib wrote:In reality, every dollar of public-sector spending on stimulus simply wiped out a dollar of private investment and output, resulting in an overall decline in GDP. This is an even more astonishing result because government spending is counted in official GDP numbers. In other words, the spending was more like a valium for lethargic economies than a stimulant.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087 ... 85010.html

Kind of like Medieval physicians "bleeding" their patient and then wondering why the patient wasn't getting any better...

The irony to all this class warfare stuff is that the average income of the poorest quintile in the US is more than 90% of the rest of the world. In fact the average income of the poorest quintile in the US is higher than the average income of the highest quintile in India.

The reality is that even the poor in the US are rich.

The "fairness" mantra makes me crazy. If it is fair to tax Mr. A at 30% because his income is higher than Mr. B's who pays 10%, shouldn't fairness dictate that Mr. A get 3 votes to Mr. B's 1 vote? If one person pays 3X another into the government shouldn't he have 3X the say in that government?

Fairness is used VERY selectively for the narrow political purposes of the person that leans on that rationale.

Poor people rarely employ lots of people. Leave the rich alone...it all works out in the end.

I'm just trying to figure out why success has become a four letter word these days?

SQLGeek wrote:I'm just trying to figure out why success has become a four letter word these days?

Because of another four letter word: ENVY. Bunch of folks who aren't happy with all that they've got, and they don't want anyone to have something they don't. Its the root of the politics of the left: if I don't have it or can't have it, then neither can you.