Specter a D?

[songsmith]

Have you ever worked for a poor person?

My main point, though, is that Eat The Rich was a pretty cool Aerosmith tune.

Yep, but how about Krokus?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVSsVPqvWJE

We're showing our age, LW. --->JMS

[lonewolf]

Have you ever worked for a poor person?

I understand the point you are making with this rhetorical question. However, how about this counter-question: If a number of low-to-middle class people own stock in a company, are you still working for a "rich person"? Not everyone who owns a business is a sole proprietor.

I have nothing against rich people. I've never wanted to be rich. Living under the poverty line sucks though, as well. My main point, though, is that Eat The Rich was a pretty cool Aerosmith tune.

Wasn't that Motorhead?

They did one called that, but its not that great and the guy can't sing for shit.

[Baceman Spiff]

so you are not rich but you feel for those that are RICH and pay their tax. you wish THEIR tax burden to be less?
however, whatever paltry refund you get goes back to the 'state' in the form of another tax so essentially you get no relief but you are ok with this?

where are you coming from man? you shpould be championing tax relief for the WORKING CLASS because that's what's YOU are!

Ok first of all, I answered all of your questions, but you haven't answered any of mine. Its not polite to answer a question with a question. But I'll try to answer yours once again, as honestly as I can.

You ask me if I feel 'rich' people's tax burden should be less. I'm for tax cuts straight across the board, not just for certain 'classes'. When taxes are cut, people have more money. When people have more money, they spend more. When people spend more, business grows. When business grows, they hire more people. When more people are working and paying taxes, more revenue is generated.

But I would even take this one step further by abolishing the income tax (along with the IRS) and go with a flat tax on purchased goods. That way EVERYBODY pays, regardless of what bracket or 'class' they are in. This also eliminates tax cheaters and loopholes.

I don't believe any political party represents the ' working class', or any individual in our government does either. Most of them haven't had a real job in years. (if ever). They don't know what its like to worry about paying the rent or mortgage on time, and still have money left over to put food on the table. So how could they possibly represent the 'working class' ? Its just more classic political rhetoric, that goes all the way back to Julius Caesar and likely before. By throwing poor people a bone every now and then ( like raising the minimum wage) they claim to understand and represent them.

Case in point: In 2002 Ed Rendell said he would eliminate property taxes, and supplement that revenue by legalizing gambling. Its the promise that pretty much got him elected. Well, we have casinos, but we're still paying property taxes. Huh...

My whole post pretty much explains "where I'm coming from". So that answers that question.

And please don't tell me what I should be championing or what I should not. There's enough people in D.C. trying to do that already.

How do you know my refund is paltry? Whats this got to do with chickens?
(sorry bad joke, couldn't resist)



Paul, yours was a great question. One that I really don't have an answer for. But let me think about it, and get back to you.

[Baceman Spiff]

[lonewolf]

My main point, though, is that Eat The Rich was a pretty cool Aerosmith tune.

Yep, but how about Krokus?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVSsVPqvWJE

We're showing our age, LW. --->JMS

Yep, but whats worse is that Krokus is a "newer" band to me.

I still consider Brian Johnson that "new guy" in AC/DC.

RIP Bon

[bassist_25]

Paul, yours was a great question. One that I really don't have an answer for. But let me think about it, and get back to you.

Just glad I could spark some interesting thought.

Here's another question, not directed at anyone in particular, in regard to taxation on the rich - While it is probably not American to limit one's ability to chase his or her dream, even if it is material wealth, could a progressive tax on the rich be a way to ensure that capital is not too centralized and, thus, not as much of a liability to the whole economy? Let me use this analogy. If you invest in stocks, you should diversify your portfolio. That way, if one company, sector, or industry starts doing poorly, it doesn't directly afffect your other stocks and cause a domino effect. Now, if a small amount of individuals have unlimited means by which to acquire assets and they make bad decisions with those assets, the ripple effects throughout the economy can be devastating. If chaos theory holds true, the larger these entities have become, the more sensitive they are to negative fluxuations. I think that's where a lot of people have gotten the "too big to fail" mantra from. Going back to my original question - Could progressive taxation be used as a economic tool to not allow individuals and entities the chance to get to the point where they're "too big to fail?"

I'm not putting on my red beret right now, but I do think that we need to ask these tough questions about our economic system.

p.s. We were just talking about the Krokus cover of Sweat's Ballroom Blitz the other night while tearing down after the gig.

[JackANSI]

Frickin' Socialists...

[lonewolf]

Could progressive taxation be used as a economic tool to not allow individuals and entities the chance to get to the point where they're "too big to fail?"

I'm not putting on my red beret right now, but I do think that we need to ask these tough questions about our economic system.

p.s. We were just talking about the Krokus cover of Sweat's Ballroom Blitz the other night while tearing down after the gig.

1st, convince me that any entity is "too big to fail". I don't buy into that theory and it seems that moron politicians are about the only ones that do.

If an entity is very large and has many important debt obligations that it cannot meet, it should go into court supervised restructuring. The importance of their obligations get sorted out in court. Call it financial triage.

That is what I believe should have happened to AIG. AIG's assets outweighed its liabilities, but it had too many short-term obligations that it could not meet. If they couldn't negotiate for more time, they should have forced the issue in court.

Dept. of Treasury should never have gotten into this bailout business--providing liquidity is the domain of the Federal Reserve. For instance:

If Chase Bank wanted to collect on MBS CDS insurance from AIG and AIG could not meet the demand, Chase should have gone to the Fed, gotten the liquidity they needed and "loaned" it to AIG. Of course, Chase keeps the cash and AIG buys more time with an IOU.

If they can't come to an agreement, BK court and tuff titties. The debts all go away and are replaced with ownership in the newly structured company. The old AIG stockholders lose their shirt and are replaced with new shareholders that AIG owed all the money to. They can then decide who's on the board of directors, the CEO, etc...the insurance industry moves on...

[JackANSI]

[PanzerFaust]

Don't forget Krokus.....

What??

[RobTheDrummer]

How do you know it's a weekday? And people that actually do work, have the right to protest being taxed out the wazoo to pay for some poor folk's doctor exam.

[JackANSI]

[RobTheDrummer]

[DirtySanchez]

That's a lie.

You work at a prison. socialist.

[JackANSI]

[Banned]

I would if the government will reimburse all the Social Security money I paid them for 39 years of working. Same for the amount they take out of my check for Medicare. I would gladly give any and all Social Security and Medicare benefits when they give me back the money they took off of me.

[RobTheDrummer]

That's a lie.

You work at a prison. socialist.

How do you figure a prison is socialism? Just because something is run by government doesn't make it socialist.

[DirtySanchez]

That's a lie.

You work at a prison. socialist.

How do you figure a prison is socialism? Just because something is run by government doesn't make it socialist.

my head just exploded.