PDA

View Full Version : Going off the Cliff?



MadMan1978
07-29-2012, 09:39 AM
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/07/28/going-off-the-cliff/

We’ve heard a lot lately about “going off the cliff” in reference to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts at midnight on December 31 and how the Democrats have finally found their spine and are standing firm.

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 10:57 AM
Letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the top 2% will only raise about 1 trillion over 10 years, and that is with static scoring. It will certainly be less than that if you account for the fact that people will change their behavior to bring in less ordinary income subject to the rates as a result of the tax increase. 100 billion per year can't even make a dent in the budget. That's less that 3% of the budget for 2012, and will be even less per year over the next ten years.

The raising taxes on the rich argument is manufactured to gin up class warfare and nothing more. It is not a practical solution to our financial crisis.

MadMan1978
07-29-2012, 12:03 PM
Maybe so but it is a start

I read a recent article on eliminating the corporate Income Tax and changing how Capital gains is taxed. Actually a smart plan that should be reviewed.

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 12:29 PM
Maybe so but it is a start

I read a recent article on eliminating the corporate Income Tax and changing how Capital gains is taxed. Actually a smart plan that should be reviewed.

It may be a start, but it is not the panacea that our President claims that it is. His claims are disingenuous, and the only reason for him is to get the lower class voters to envy the rich for his own political gain. The more he can take from the rich and give to the poor, the more votes he can buy, and the more power he can have.

MadMan1978
07-29-2012, 12:41 PM
It may be a start, but it is not the panacea that our President claims that it is. His claims are disingenuous, and the only reason for him is to get the lower class voters to envy the rich for his own political gain. The more he can take from the rich and give to the poor, the more votes he can buy, and the more power he can have.

STOP RALLY it is getting old! EVER PRESIDENT HAS DONE THE SAME THING! PUSH the Party's agenda! IOt was OK for Bush 1 and 2? and Reagan ?
and for that fact Clinton?

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 01:16 PM
STOP RALLY it is getting old! EVER PRESIDENT HAS DONE THE SAME THING! PUSH the Party's agenda! IOt was OK for Bush 1 and 2? and Reagan ?
and for that fact Clinton?

Every president has manipulated the lower class to convince them that the rich people are the problem with america?

Wickabee
07-29-2012, 01:49 PM
Letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the top 2% will only raise about 1 trillion over 10 years, and that is with static scoring. It will certainly be less than that if you account for the fact that people will change their behavior to bring in less ordinary income subject to the rates as a result of the tax increase. 100 billion per year can't even make a dent in the budget. That's less that 3% of the budget for 2012, and will be even less per year over the next ten years.

The raising taxes on the rich argument is manufactured to gin up class warfare and nothing more. It is not a practical solution to our financial crisis.

Would probably be more if those wealthy people actually paid taxes instead of hiding their money off-shore. People like Romney want the middle class to pay for everything.

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 01:58 PM
Would probably be more if those wealthy people actually paid taxes instead of hiding their money off-shore. People like Romney want the middle class to pay for everything.

Is that what they do? Do they avoid paying income taxes by having offshore bank accounts? Are all wealthy people tax cheats? They all want the middle class to pay for everything? It must be one grand conspiracy. Add a few more specifics to your argument instead of using straw men.

Wickabee
07-29-2012, 02:05 PM
Is that what they do? Do they avoid paying income taxes by having offshore bank accounts? Are all wealthy people tax cheats? They all want the middle class to pay for everything? It must be one grand conspiracy. Add a few more specifics to your argument instead of using straw men.

What conspiract? It's no conspiracy for a bunch of rich people to tax dodge. It's damn near law that rich people won't pay their fair share of taxes. They have the money to find the loopholes, the middle class don't. You want class warfare, stop calling for the middle class to pay for all roads, police, teachers, firefighters, etc, etc.

Do not allow keeping money offshore.

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 02:08 PM
What conspiract? It's no conspiracy for a bunch of rich people to tax dodge. It's damn near law that rich people won't pay their fair share of taxes. They have the money to find the loopholes, the middle class don't. You want class warfare, stop calling for the middle class to pay for all roads, police, teachers, firefighters, etc, etc.

Do not allow keeping money offshore.

What loopholes do they find? How, exactly, do they tax dodge? What is a fair share? You realize that police, firefighters, teachers are paid for with state tax revenue, not federal tax revenue, right? I respect you and think you're a pretty smart guy, and I'd love to have an informed discussion with you on tax policy, but if you want an honest discussion about this stuff, I request that you stop generalizing and start getting specific.

Wickabee
07-29-2012, 02:20 PM
What loopholes do they find? How, exactly, do they tax dodge? What is a fair share? You realize that police, firefighters, teachers are paid for with state tax revenue, not federal tax revenue, right? I respect you and think you're a pretty smart guy, and I'd love to have an informed discussion with you on tax policy, but if you want an honest discussion about this stuff, I request that you stop generalizing and start getting specific.

1 - You know.

2 - Again

3 - Fair share is a fair share, not deducting what's in the Caymans

4 - I'm sure they have their dodges for state as well as federal.

5 - Admittedly I don't have a working knowledge of the American tax system, but I, as well as you, know what's going on. The Republicans dream is to have the middle class pay all taxes. I just can't believe they've found enough middle class voters stupid enough to agree.

AUTaxMan
07-29-2012, 02:52 PM
1 - You know.

2 - Again

3 - Fair share is a fair share, not deducting what's in the Caymans

4 - I'm sure they have their dodges for state as well as federal.

5 - Admittedly I don't have a working knowledge of the American tax system, but I, as well as you, know what's going on. The Republicans dream is to have the middle class pay all taxes. I just can't believe they've found enough middle class voters stupid enough to agree.


1 and 2. Acutally, I don't know. That's why I'm asking you. My guess is that you, like most people, don't know the answer either. Please prove me wrong.

3. You are demonstrating that you are merely beating the liberal drum without putting independent thought into your opinions.

4. You're sure?

5. Please have a basic knowledge about matters you are discussing before you opine on things that you don't really know anything about. The republicans, mostly made up of the middle class, do NOT want to have all the middle class pay all taxes. That is an ignorant statement.

JustAlex
07-29-2012, 04:30 PM
5 - Admittedly I don't have a working knowledge of the American tax system, but I, as well as you, know what's going on. The Republicans dream is to have the middle class pay all taxes. I just can't believe they've found enough middle class voters stupid enough to agree.
I think the republican dream is to have the richest Americans have little to no taxes at all.

Why?

Because they have tricked their simple minded followers that they are the "Job creators", that without them there are ZERO jobs and this country would cease to exist in it's present state.

They tell the American public that there is so much outsourcing because the "Job creators" can't deal with these "high taxes".

FACT: The U.S has one of the LOWEST tax rates on this planet for first world countries, and the Bush tax cuts have been in effect for a DECADE and that is STILL not enough for the "Job Creators".


I HATE the Republican party.....I really do....I don't know how ordinary middle and LOWER class Americans can support them.

"Class Warfare"???

They're the ones who have been invented such a thing by allowing the Richest Americans to get away with anything they want!

Wickabee
07-29-2012, 05:24 PM
1 - Haha, no I don't know the titles of the tax codes they're in. I guess that's proof that all Romeny's money is in the US and he's not legally hiding it from the government through loopholes. Man, with that logic we can definitely prove God doesn't exist too! Because lack of presented proof from one source equates a lack of existence. GENIUS!

3 - Yes, you're right. Everyone who disagrees with YOU obviously never put any thought into anything. YOU are infallible. The rest of us are scum. I am not worth, etc etc. Now that we've reaffirmed your ego can we get on with our lives?

4 - Yes, although I don't know the titles and exact codes, which means I absolutely must be wrong. You are the chosen (even though you're not looking up anything to refute my claim and it's YOUR tax system we're talking about).

5 - I have basic knowledge. You are seeking exact knowledge from me. I have never been anything but up front on what I bring to the table. You're asking for more than I've offered. You're asking for information which has nothing to do with me and everything to do with you. You know the codes and I'm sure you can find the cheats much more easily than I can. Unfortunately, you won't look into it for yourself because you're such a free thinker...wait...

AUTaxMan
07-30-2012, 11:51 AM
1 - Haha, no I don't know the titles of the tax codes they're in. I guess that's proof that all Romeny's money is in the US and he's not legally hiding it from the government through loopholes. Man, with that logic we can definitely prove God doesn't exist too! Because lack of presented proof from one source equates a lack of existence. GENIUS!

Baseless allegations do not equal fact. Lack of proof does not equal lack of existence, but the burden is on you to prove the allegations are true, not on me to defend allegations that you haven't even defined. That would be like the police telling me I'm guilty of a nameless crime unless I prove that I'm not.

3 - Yes, you're right. Everyone who disagrees with YOU obviously never put any thought into anything. YOU are infallible. The rest of us are scum. I am not worth, etc etc. Now that we've reaffirmed your ego can we get on with our lives?

No, but clearly you have some personal issues. I am not infallible, and you are not scum. I neither said nor implied either of those things. You say fair share is fair share, but you can't even tell me what it means. How am I supposed to know what my fair share is?

5 - I have basic knowledge. You are seeking exact knowledge from me. I have never been anything but up front on what I bring to the table. You're asking for more than I've offered. You're asking for information which has nothing to do with me and everything to do with you. You know the codes and I'm sure you can find the cheats much more easily than I can. Unfortunately, you won't look into it for yourself because you're such a free thinker...wait...

You have formed an opinion that all rich people are tax dodgers. I want to know what you've based that on.



Responses in bold

mrveggieman
07-30-2012, 11:55 AM
Responses in bold


As far as the rich being tax dogers since they are rich most of them became and stayed that way by taking care of their money. They have tax advisors to tell them where to hide their money to avoid paying taxes. On the cool I can't be mad at them for doing right by their own money. I would probably do the same if I had it like that. However as long as we have the current tax system the rich will continue to avoid paying their fair share and leaving the working people as the burden bayer of the tax system. That is why we need to switch to a fair tax system now.

AUTaxMan
07-30-2012, 12:17 PM
As far as the rich being tax dogers since they are rich most of them became and stayed that way by taking care of their money. They have tax advisors to tell them where to hide their money to avoid paying taxes. On the cool I can't be mad at them for doing right by their own money. I would probably do the same if I had it like that. However as long as we have the current tax system the rich will continue to avoid paying their fair share and leaving the working people as the burden bayer of the tax system. That is why we need to switch to a fair tax system now.

If you employ tax professionals to legally minimize your taxes, are you a "tax dodger?" There we see "fair share" again. What does that mean? Seriously.

mrveggieman
07-30-2012, 12:21 PM
If you employ tax professionals to legally minimize your taxes, are you a "tax dodger?" There we see "fair share" again. What does that mean? Seriously.


I am saying that you legally got over on the system. It is not an indictment of the person who avoided the taxes but rather an indictment of our tax system. A better tax system would be a flat tax on consumption as perscribed by the fair tax.

AUTaxMan
07-30-2012, 12:56 PM
I am saying that you legally got over on the system. It is not an indictment of the person who avoided the taxes but rather an indictment of our tax system. A better tax system would be a flat tax on consumption as perscribed by the fair tax.

Totally agree veg, but it IS used as an indictment of the taxpayers, and it should not be.

mrveggieman
07-30-2012, 12:59 PM
Totally agree veg, but it IS used as an indictment of the taxpayers, and it should not be.


I also would like to blame the politicians who write these tax laws in order for their rich buddies as well as themselves to avoid paying taxes.

AUTaxMan
07-30-2012, 01:01 PM
I also would like to blame the politicians who write these tax laws in order for their rich buddies as well as themselves to avoid paying taxes.

Agreed.

Wickabee
07-30-2012, 01:53 PM
AUT, I can't quote you when you lay it out like that. Don't know if that's your intent, but it is what is is.

1 - You're asking me for exact tax code. I guess I'll have to admit I don't know the exact tax code and you can blissfully believe that means it's true and no one in America tax dodges. You could look it up and see they do, but it's easier to vote Republican when you're ignorant I guess. Tra-la-la

2 - I told you what a fair share is. It's not my fault you ignored it. I'll give it to you again. Fair Share is NOT sending your money to other countries for the purpose of paying less taxes. That's twice I've said it now. If you ignore it again, I can't help you.

3 - I have personal issues? Well thank you doctor. I'm going to decide not to take that as a personal insult, though I know it was intended as one, simply because the only people who don't have personal problems are dead, oh and you I guess. Must be great to be you with no problems and all the answers (as long as they reaffirm your beliefs)

4 - I've never said that. I generalized by saying "The rich" but I don't know what else to call them. Maybe "some of" or "most of" would have helped but I assumed you were smart enough to read into what I meant instead of going into the semantics of "You claim all. I want names, phone numbers, tax codes". This crap is why nothing gets done in government. Too many politicians argue like you. When people argue like that nothing gets done and your country goes farther down the crapper. Good show.

AUTaxMan
07-30-2012, 03:56 PM
1 - No, I don't want to know the exact code section. I just want to know what tax dodges you're talking about. It is a straw man argument. It would be like me saying that a lot of Democrats are criminals. I'm not exactly sure what crimes they may be committing in their own personal lives, but I know some of them are committing crimes. I know my statement is factual, but without any substance to back it up, what is the point of making the statement expect to inflame?

2 - So the rich people who don't keep money in overseas bank accounts are paying their fair share?

3 - You are the one who personalized this discussion by making the baseless statement that I think you are scum. I do not.

4 - When you refer to a nebulous body of people as "the rich," regardless of what you mean by "rich," how am I to know whether you mean all, some, most, few, or one if you don't clarify that for me. It certainly affects your argument. If you said "some of the rich" are tax cheats, I would agree with you, just as some of the poor are tax cheats. If you say "rich people" are tax cheats, I am led to believe that you think all or most of them are tax cheats. I would disagree with this point. Your clarification is the difference in my agreeing or disagreeing with you.

Wickabee
07-30-2012, 08:38 PM
1 - What do you want then? What are you asking me for if not the tax codes? Other than that, fair enough, but this isn't a court of law and you know as well as I do that the tax shelters and hiding spots exist. The fact that I can't come up with an example right now changes nothing.

2 - Presumably. I'm not going to get into what the tax code should or should not be, but I will say moving your money to another country for the purpose of paying lower taxes should equate treason. Maybe if I become wealthy my views will change, but that would make me a hypocrite either way.

3 - The way you write comes off very much, "I know more than you." and you rarely argue the points, but instead focus on semantics, when you know what the overall point is. You can play dumb all you want, but you know better than you've let on here.

4 - When you are deliberate in your non-understanding, it ends any productive area of discussion. You're usually a great poster in here but lately you've really devolved in your arguments. You've started focusing solely on the language, s much so that you continually (claim to) miss the point. You end up winning your arguments because you haven't been really worth arguing with. I'd have to have a lawyer read through every one of my posts before I posted to satisfy your requirements. You know what my meaning is, but deliberately ignore that for the sake of saying, "Who are these 'rich people' you speak of?"
Maybe I've just been giving you too much credit, I don't know. I thought you were better than only arguing language and semantics.