The Rich Are Taxed Enough (Debate) - Intelligence Squared U.S.

Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member

"Robert Reich and Mark Zandi debate Glenn Hubbard and Arthur Laffer on the topic: The Rich Are Taxed Enough. Moderated by John Donvan.

How do we fix the economy? The U.S. government's budget deficit is nearing a trillion dollars for the fourth straight year and unemployment remains high. With the Bush-era tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of 2012, what is the best move for continued economic recovery? President Obama says we should raise taxes on those making more than $250,000 to reduce the deficit. Others say that the richest 1% already pay more than a quarter of all federal taxes and higher taxes for job creators would slow economic growth. Are the nation's wealthiest not paying their "fair share," or should tax breaks be extended for everyone in the name of job creation?

For: Glenn Hubbard
For: Arthur Laffer

Against: Robert Reich
Against: Mark Zandi"

Debate starts around the 10-minute mark


Laffer and Hubbard get taken to school!
 
G

GrowUrOwnDank

Well-Known Member
Oh no. Here we go again. So tell me. What exactly is wrong with the economy? From where I'm sitting. Mostly everything seems just fine. I mean, I don't know exactly what the criteria is to be on food stamps.... Energy drink manufacturing workers gotta get paid too.
Padawanbater2 said:
How do we fix the economy?
Click to expand...
 
MistrBurrberry

MistrBurrberry

Well-Known Member
Too many people focus on the amount paid by the top earners, while ignoring the disparity between those top earners and the rest of us.

The real debate should be: Is the system a meritocracy (or even close) allowing some to be trillionaires and others to wonder where their next meal will come from as they live on the street (in the same country or even city as the previously mentioned trillionaires).

If the answer is Yes, it is fair, then there is a point that the wealthy pay the majority in raw dollars while their percent of income/wealth paid out in taxes remains low.

If the answer is No, we don't have a meritocracy or anything close and it is in fact a rigged game, then obviously if some people hoard all the wealth, in a system that relies on paying a percentage of your wealth, those super wealthy will pay more.

Personally, I think it's obvious we have nothing resembling a meritocracy. Social mobility in the US and UK is the lowest of all OECD countries, and I think this quote by George Monbiot sums it up best:

"If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire. The claims that the ultra-rich 1% make for themselves – that they are possessed of unique intelligence or creativity or drive – are examples of the self-attribution fallacy. This means crediting yourself with outcomes for which you weren’t responsible. Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth, as such jobs are taken disproportionately by people born in certain places and into certain classes."

Read the full thing, it's great(ly depressing) and full of references: http://www.monbiot.com/2011/11/07/the-self-attribution-fallacy/
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
GrowUrOwnDank said:
Oh no. Here we go again. So tell me. What exactly is wrong with the economy? From where I'm sitting. Mostly everything seems just fine. I mean, I don't know exactly what the criteria is to be on food stamps.... Energy drink manufacturing workers gotta get paid too.
Click to expand...
from where you sit, we are still being paid $7.25/hr by the very same who do not pay taxes..no money to spend on their goods..the pricing noose tightens as we inhale their increases; paying their share of taxes for infrastructure which they shifted burden to us.

Two of the most amazing facts..

<50% of Americans makes $30k or less

80 people hold the 50% of all world wealth.

But Bernie Sanders is unelectable:lol:
 
Last edited:
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
People at 30k don't pay taxes. If they have property or kids they can pay a NEG tax rate.
Click to expand...
The hell they don't..the SF/M
Without deductions i.e. empty nesters pays your share..too young to retire, too old to leverage any deductions..you extra 50 show up to eat at the picnic set for 100, and you take a portion of mine which I share then tell me the $6k of $30k is nothing..? We are the highest tax paying demographic ratio-wise.

Future self is telling you to wake up..your on services at this time of your life when I was financially productive during same..what is your future(rhetorical)?
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
The hell they don't..the SWF/M
Without deductions i.e. empty nesters pays your share..too young to retire, too old to leverage any deductions..you extra 50 show up to eat at the picnic set for 100, and you take a portion of mine which I share then tell me the $6k of $30k is nothing..? We are the highest tax paying demographic ratio-wise.

Future self is telling you to wake up..your on services at this time of your life when I was financially productive during same..what is your future(rhetorical)?
Click to expand...
Yes single people pay taxes at a higher rate than married or married with children.

Single people don't get any deductions.
 
A

anzohaze

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
Yes single people pay taxes at a higher rate than married or married with children.

Single people don't get any deductions.
Click to expand...
Agreed I was single made to much money for age and I was getting taxed pretty hard. 36% was taken from paycheck every week now I am married w 2 kids is about 24%
 
G

GrowUrOwnDank

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:


Effective tax rates for the top earners are too low, spending is too high

That's basically it
Click to expand...
I mean I get it. Disparity between the classes and all that. Not saying that I completely disagree with your view either. It's just that I see most people out and about getting ready for the holidays and buying up all kind of stuff for gifts and what not. Throwing money around like crazy. My thoughts are that we all want more more more yet, we already have all this stuff. I think the economy is fine. I wish I made more money too but, I think time is better spent realizing what we do have and not to dwell on what others may have we perhaps can't afford.

Question. Socialist nation on a scale of 1-10. Where do you think the US is on that scale? I'm thinking at least a 7 with all the programs available for poorer people.
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
anzohaze said:
Agreed I was single made to much money for age and I was getting taxed pretty hard. 36% was taken from paycheck every week now I am married w 2 kids is about 24%
Click to expand...
If you pay taxes on property your effective tax rate goes even lower.

Last year I had a -11% effective tax rate.
 
MistrBurrberry

MistrBurrberry

Well-Known Member
GrowUrOwnDank said:
Question. Socialist nation on a scale of 1-10. Where do you think the US is on that scale? I'm thinking at least a 7 with all the programs available for poorer people.
Click to expand...
First of all, socialism just means the workers owning the means of production, not safety nets. So other than a few co-ops, everyone who is independently employed but without underlings, and partner type businesses, the US has no socialism.

If you meant social democracy, the US is *maybe* a 3. The safety nets available for poor people in the US are abysmal. I live in Iceland and our safety nets are at least 10x as good, and they still aren't good enough to prevent a pseudo caste based system, and I'd put us at a 7 or 8.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:

"Robert Reich and Mark Zandi debate Glenn Hubbard and Arthur Laffer on the topic: The Rich Are Taxed Enough. Moderated by John Donvan.

How do we fix the economy? The U.S. government's budget deficit is nearing a trillion dollars for the fourth straight year and unemployment remains high. With the Bush-era tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of 2012, what is the best move for continued economic recovery? President Obama says we should raise taxes on those making more than $250,000 to reduce the deficit. Others say that the richest 1% already pay more than a quarter of all federal taxes and higher taxes for job creators would slow economic growth. Are the nation's wealthiest not paying their "fair share," or should tax breaks be extended for everyone in the name of job creation?

For: Glenn Hubbard
For: Arthur Laffer

Against: Robert Reich
Against: Mark Zandi"

Debate starts around the 10-minute mark

Laffer and Hubbard get taken to school!
Click to expand...
This is no longer about money; it's about the power that having all the money gives them. Thomas Piketty was on point when he said the current system favors an aristocratic class.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
GrowUrOwnDank said:
Oh no. Here we go again. So tell me. What exactly is wrong with the economy? From where I'm sitting. Mostly everything seems just fine. I mean, I don't know exactly what the criteria is to be on food stamps.... Energy drink manufacturing workers gotta get paid too.
Click to expand...
Thank you for removing all doubt in my mind that when it comes to economics, you can be counted on to be wrong, wrong and wrong some more.

The percentage of Americans currently on food stamps IS AT AN ALL TIME HISTORIC HIGH, YOU IMBECILE! How is that in any way acceptable or 'normal'?!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
Correct.

Sales taxes don't change but the price of goods has been rising. Groceries have risen 10-15% this year.
Click to expand...
That's why this is known as a 'regressive' tax, meaning that poor people pay a larger percentage of their income on this tax than wealthy people do.

Hence why there are bans on food taxes in many places.
 
G

GrowUrOwnDank

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the feedback guys. Imbecile. LMAO! Anyway there are certain subjects that people will never agree on. In a way right or wrong, what we ourselves perceive is different and unique to the objectivity of each person. Suppose I should have started something more on the lines of social policies or whatever. Thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top