Obama says we need to "spread the wealth around"

Kann

unsung wrote:

The word 'tax' had nothing to do with it.

The word tax has everything to do with it, to spread the wealth you need to tax it. Unless you don't mind paying taxes if the money isn't used for welfare, like for instance bailing out financial institutions or funding an ever growing army?

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our
tax system works.

Actually currently the system doesn't give the same beer to all the 10 men. If Ph.D. Professor's of Economics actually over simplify the system like that it's no wonder we get to see debacles such as the current one.

Gonzo1977

Strangest Tribe wrote:

it's INCOME tax!!!! Not small business tax. If you own a small business just don't pay your self more than $250,000.

Exactly.

90% of small business owners in the United States do not make more than $250,000 per year. That is a fact. Obama's tax credit will actually aid small business and not "harm" small business.

It doesn't take a degree in economics to figure this out.

To say that Obama is against small business is complete bullshit. If anyone would actually take the time to inform themselves on what Obama's plan actually is and stop listening to retoric drummed up by the shit smearing Republican base, they realize that these idiotic claims are about as absurd as the whole "Muslim" "Terrorist" crap that they're drumming in your ear as well.

Obama's plan is aimed at generating more money and easing the taxes on the "middle class"

Remember them? The Middle Class?

Apparently, the OP thinks that anyone not making over $250,000 per year is someone who just doesn't work hard enough.

The Middle Class is key to this economic crisis. The more money Middle Class families have to spend, the better.

While we're at it...We should try and give the Middle Class some jobs as well.

JSBE

what does mccain have to say? oh wait, he doesn't have a plan...or at least his advisors haven't approved it yet, although we should be getting it today...or so his advisors say...

Strangest Tribe

The wealthiest man I know only pays himself $7500 a year. He makes several million a year and none of it goes to income taxes.

Gonzo1977

MrMerkinball wrote:

BAR STOOL ECONOMICS

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something
like this:


The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day
and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw
them a curve.

'Since you are all such good customers, he said, I'm going to reduce the
cost of your daily beer by $20.

Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the
first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what
about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the
$20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that
from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would
be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he
proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.!

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100%
savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off t han before. And the first four continued
to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare
their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20, 'declared the sixth man. He pointed to
the tenth man, 'but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I
got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'*

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat
down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,
they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between
all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our
tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit
from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and
they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking
overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

Ahh..If only life were as simple as drinking beer

This was e-mailed to me long ago by My "Republican" friend.

My Commie friends and I found it rather amusing as it only presented a half truth. You know....the part of the story that only benifits one side of the argument. It doesn't really tell you why the 10th guy is so rich and why the 1st 4 guys are so poor.

Anyways...us Commies came up with a Prequel to the story

ala George Lucus.

Here it goes:

The nine poorest men worked for the tenth man. They all worked hard, paid their taxes, raised their families, and obeyed the law.

The company they all worked for(owned by the tenth man) was making huge profits because of their labor. Over the past ten years the tenth man's income went up 150% while he (making a good business decision) continually cut the health benefits and retirement benefits of his workers(to keep up with the increasing costs).

During this time the tenth man outsourced two of the men's jobs overseas and layed them off and gave his remaining employees just enough of a raise to help them keep up with inflation. At the same time increasing his own income.

Thus making it so that in the past ten years those left working for the company had no real increase in income eventhough the company they worked for was making huge profits; all of which was going to the tenth man.

Drink that one down...Tell me what you think.

unsung

justam wrote:

It's better for everyone in America if we don't have a large number of people living in poverty.

Unless you started out in poverty and worked your way up, you don't know that you work harder than some poor person trying to feed his children with a low wage job. You just use that idea to justify your lack of compassion.

If they are holding down a job and not breaking any laws I'm more than willing to help. If they are lying around the couch all day until the moon comes out then they are out in the streets doing bad things I don't want them to have anything for free. The same goes for illegal aliens, I don't want them to have anything paid for by this government, including anything in their native language. Now if there of legal immigrant status and they are attending school or holding down a job without breaking the laws my hand is open to them.

I'm just sick of some people thinking they are owed something, or those that think they can get away with it in the first place.

unsung

inmytree wrote:

I'm sure you feel the same way about corporate welfare...

Right...?

I am against every type of government bailout or economic stimulus package when tax money is involved.

_

unsung wrote:

Give them money?

How about earn it?

You want to fix the financial mess you don't need to tax more. We need to STOP SPENDING MORE.

If you feel it is acceptable to tax people who work for a living more so that those who refuse to work can have more you are either too lazy to work or you are INSANE.

You're talking as if that 2% of Americans who make over $250,000/year are the only ones who work hard. And you know that's bullshit.

unsung

Kann wrote:

The word tax has everything to do with it, to spread the wealth you need to tax it.

Perhaps you don't understand the point I'm trying to make. I'm against the re-distribution of wealth.

Strangest Tribe

unsung wrote:

If they are holding down a job and not breaking any laws I'm more than willing to help. If they are lying around the couch all day until the moon comes out then they are out in the streets doing bad things I don't want them to have anything for free. The same goes for illegal aliens, I don't want them to have anything paid for by this government, including anything in their native language. Now if there of legal immigrant status and they are attending school or holding down a job without breaking the laws my hand is open to them.

I'm just sick of some people thinking they are owed something, or those that think they can get away with it in the first place.

Most people want to work and make an honest living. Everyone is afraid of someone getting a "free ride" and that's wrong...
Different circumstances apply with different people.

Personally I'd rather have my taxes pay for freeloaders and welfare babies because it's a hell of a lot cheaper to feed them than to send them to prison which is what eventually happens if we reduce their aid.

_

unsung wrote:

Sure no problem, I'll pay for that. First off they must NEVER be able to accept government welfare again. No food stamps, no free health care. NOTHING. They are subject to random drug tests as well. No second chances for offenders.

I'm sick of paying for those that are nothing but human leeches.

You seem to forget (or not care about) the fact that much of the "welfare" distributed by our government is for the benefit of children. You would have children go without food and healthcare just because their parents don't live up to your standards?

Gonzo1977

chiefojibwa wrote:

those kids need to get a fucking job and stop leeching.

Yeah those stupid babies...all they do is whine. That Barack "Hussien" Obama is a no good "baby lover".

Kann

unsung wrote:

Perhaps you don't understand the point I'm trying to make. I'm against the re-distribution of wealth.

I don't understand your point then. How do you redistribute the wealth without taxing it? And if your sole problem is redistribution not taxes, what do you do with that excess money?

unsung

Kann wrote:

I don't understand your point then. How do you redistribute the wealth without taxing it? And if your sole problem is redistribution not taxes, what do you do with that excess money?

I'm glad you asked.

First off I'd stop the unnecessary spending.

Second I would create training programs for people who are in poverty.

Third I would offer huge tax breaks to corporations to keep their manufacturing in the US. That iPod would no longer be made in China, and you would have someone who was on welfare now holding down a job. The company sees it as an even trade, and would benefit from the positive publicity of bringing their manufacturing back to the US. These people now have money to spend here, they are off welfare, and we have a company back to building a product in the United States of America.

It is a win win for everyone, well except for the Chinese. haha

darthvedder81

"Middle class tax-cuts" are bullshit. The overwhelming majority of the middle class pays $0 in federal income tax yet Obama wants to write checks to these people. So where's that money coming from? It's not being created it's being redistributed in the new postmodern "fairness" movement. It's not "socialism" or "communism" it's "fairness"!

You want fair? Then we need a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. Right now the system is completely unfair in that top 5% of wage earners in this country pay almost all the income tax. Too bad McCain won't take that position to differentiate himself.

inmytree

darthvedder81 wrote:

"Middle class tax-cuts" are bullshit. The overwhelming majority of the middle class pays $0 in federal income tax yet Obama wants to write checks to these people. So where's that money coming from? It's not being created it's being redistributed in the new postmodern "fairness" movement. It's not "socialism" or "communism" it's "fairness"!

You want fair? Then we need a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. Right now the system is completely unfair in that top 5% of wage earners in this country pay almost all the income tax. Too bad McCain won't take that position to differentiate himself.

overwhelming majority, huh...

could you back that up with any real data...?

darthvedder81

scb wrote:

You seem to forget (or not care about) the fact that much of the "welfare" distributed by our government is for the benefit of children. You would have children go without food and healthcare just because their parents don't live up to your standards?

We don't need government food and healthcare assistance. We really don't. Private charities and organizations are more than capable even in a bad economy to help people. I volunteered in a Salvation Army a couple years ago and we had to throw out expired food and medication. Oh and the place was half empty. I asked the manager there if this was a fluke and he said it was pretty common in shelters throughout the Twin Cities.

darthvedder81

inmytree wrote:

overwhelming majority, huh...

could you back that up with any real data...?

I would love to:

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

OK so I guess the bottom 50% pays 2.99% technically. But most people are likely to get that all back (and then some) if they claim a dependent or two or own a home.

Strangest Tribe

it's more than just income...

Sure the subject surrounding income is very debateable but most middle class wage earners don't provide a balance sheet and declare profits and losses and seize the overwhelming benefits of writing off personal as business expenses...

If we can avoid the "income" charade and base it purely on wage earners the middle class still pays the overwhelming majority of tax in this country.

darthvedder81

Strangest Tribe wrote:

it's more than just income...

Sure the subject surrounding income is very debateable but most middle class wage earners don't provide a balance sheet and declare profits and losses and seize the overwhelming benefits of writing off personal as business expenses...

If we can avoid the "income" charade and base it purely on wage earners the middle class still pays the overwhelming majority of tax in this country.

Huh? I honestly have no idea what you just said. Your first paragraph makes no sense.