Where Is The PROOF That The Conservative Agenda Works?

mame

mame

Well-Known Member
BudMcLovin said:
"The rich keep doing the things that make them rich and the poor keep doing the things that make them poor". I can't remember who said it but it wasn't me.
How about we offer economic and finance classes to the poor instead of a check?
Click to expand...
But it's really not that simple. The facts are, that over the last few decades wealth has moved rapidly upwards. More people are left out than ever before. if it was simply a matter of people being stupid, than the 50's and 60's would have never happened... Some economist argue that this is due to technology - and this makes sense to an extent because the timing works but allow me to throw another cog into that machine... Around this time unionization rates went from over 30% of our total workforce in 1973 to under 12% today (canada's unionization rate remained at ~30%). Unions historically have been one of the few groups of whom place an upwards pressure in wages. Does the rapid weakening of this force have anything to do with it? absolutely. What caused this? Greed by the top few percentile. Regular people didn't cause this mess. The wealthy did. Maybe you should take your rose colored glasses of idealism off... Maybe then you'd stop hating the poor.
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
Dude I used to be poor. I worked 2 sometimes 3 jobs the first time I went through college. This time I got a sugar mamma. Any way I don’t hate the poor but I did hate being poor. I’m all for the government offering classes to lower income people so they are more valuable to the market place.

I think the decline of the union has more to do with government taking a larger roll in the protection of workers. OSHA being the largest government contributor. Plus I think a lot of businesses are just sick of the union bullshit. I’ve seen union people fire from a construction site and get sent right back to the same job site. Even though the project manager wanted the lazy bastards gone there was nothing he could do because of union contracts.
 
mame

mame

Well-Known Member
i think the decline of the union has more to do with government taking a larger roll in the protection of workers.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point but I'm not convinced that's the whole picture.

businesses began outsourcing all of our low skilled labor that used to still pay decent wages to places like China for one... Some businesses found that simply moving into the south from the midwest was enough savings for them. It also worked out politically as the South is a breeding ground for anti union sentiment.

I'd argue that if the South had unionization rates in line with the rest of the country we'd have higher median household income - the most commonly used measurement for "prosperity" within a country. 5% of Mississippi’s workforce claimed membership to a Union... The Median household income was ~36,000. Michigan, one of the most unionized states at 20.5% commands a median household income of ~$45,000. That's a 25% increase in household income. I chose these two because the cost of living is less magnified than states such as New York vs. South Carolina (the most and least unionized states).
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
BudMcLovin said:
How much do you think is their fair share? How much should the government be allowed to take from one person? How about making the lowest 40% of income earners to pay something, anything toward federal income taxes? How about $1 a year, is that too much? How is it fair they pay nothing in federal income taxes but it’s the rich not paying their fair share?

We have about $1.6 trillion dollar deficit this year. All I’ve heard from Democrats is tax the rich do you really think the government can simple raise all that from taxing people more? Does government really need to spend all that money? Are they spending it in the right places?
Click to expand...

I think that because the rich benefit more from this country,it's laws, it's infrastructure and it's government, that they should pay more. I think that because their average tax rate after loopholes and deductions is something between 7 and 15 percent while the poorer pay as much as 30, they should be taxed more. I think as someone else was mentioning, that the basis of taxation is taking a man's life from him. He spends a portion of his working time not benefiting himself but his government. If that is the case and it is, then if one man gets $1000 dollars an hour in his profession and another gets $20, then the rich guy owes a thousand and the poor one twenty. The lower 40 percent pay all sorts of taxes, they just don't pay federal income tax.
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
mame said:
That's a fair point but I'm not convinced that's the whole picture.

businesses began outsourcing all of our low skilled labor that used to still pay decent wages to places like China for one... Some businesses found that simply moving into the south from the midwest was enough savings for them. It also worked out politically as the South is a breeding ground for anti union sentiment.

I'd argue that if the South had unionization rates in line with the rest of the country we'd have higher median household income - the most commonly used measurement for "prosperity" within a country. 5% of Mississippi’s workforce claimed membership to a Union... The Median household income was ~36,000. Michigan, one of the most unionized states at 20.5% commands a median household income of ~$45,000. That's a 25% increase in household income. I chose these two because the cost of living is less magnified than states such as New York vs. South Carolina (the most and least unionized states).
Click to expand...
No it’s not the whole picture but a part. I’d say business practices and people’s personal opinion on unions are the rest. Of course what else is left?
I think businesses began out souring jobs because we as consumers demand lower prices. So it’s us as a society that requires more blame than the manufactures. I mean they adapt or die. When one company jumps shore and gets a comparative advantage over the rest of the industry, it’s just a matter of time until the others follow suit or go out of business.

I don’t know how old you are but do you remember back in the 90’s the whole made in America push right after NAFT passed. Hell today I can’t find a toy for my kid that’s not made in china. And I think the only way we get those corporations back is to give them a reason to come back. Make it cheaper to do business in this country. We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. Global companies can manipulate the tax code to pay nothing like GE while local and nation corps take a big hit. If we lowered that rate or stopped taxing corporations they would have an advantage over the rest of the global market place.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
BudMcLovin said:
Why don’t you show me how my story has changed? Go find the post and back up your mouth.
Click to expand...
oops dude I was using my smart phone and typing on another post but then went to your post and was going to comment about OSHA, but my phone was freezing up and the same post I posted elsewhere showed up on you as well...sorry ...but my comment about OSHA was do you realize how many lives they have saved in the aircraft industry...again that other post was not meant for you...one reason why I hate posting from my phone..weird shit happens..
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
BudMcLovin said:
No it’s not the whole picture but a part. I’d say business practices and people’s personal opinion on unions are the rest. Of course what else is left?
I think businesses began out souring jobs because we as consumers demand lower prices. So it’s us as a society that requires more blame than the manufactures. I mean they adapt or die. When one company jumps shore and gets a comparative advantage over the rest of the industry, it’s just a matter of time until the others follow suit or go out of business.

I don’t know how old you are but do you remember back in the 90’s the whole made in America push right after NAFT passed. Hell today I can’t find a toy for my kid that’s not made in china. And I think the only way we get those corporations back is to give them a reason to come back. Make it cheaper to do business in this country. We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. Global companies can manipulate the tax code to pay nothing like GE while local and nation corps take a big hit. If we lowered that rate or stopped taxing corporations they would have an advantage over the rest of the global market place.
Click to expand...

Do you really think it is the tax rate that has corporations jump ship? Hardly, it has to do with what they are forced to pay for labor. If they can get their products made by people they pay 18 cents an hour they will do so. We in this country will never work for such low wages and so no matter what their tax incentive is, they will not return to this country.
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
canndo said:
I think that because the rich benefit more from this country,it's laws, it's infrastructure and it's government, that they should pay more. I think that because their average tax rate after loopholes and deductions is something between 7 and 15 percent while the poorer pay as much as 30, they should be taxed more. I think as someone else was mentioning, that the basis of taxation is taking a man's life from him. He spends a portion of his working time not benefiting himself but his government. If that is the case and it is, then if one man gets $1000 dollars an hour in his profession and another gets $20, then the rich guy owes a thousand and the poor one twenty. The lower 40 percent pay all sorts of taxes, they just don't pay federal income tax.
Click to expand...
The argument you make is valid but I think it’s up to the guy making $20 an hour to make himself worth $1000. The other guy took the time to invest in his future. And just focusing on what he makes in comparison ignores that. Of course I think taxing income is the wrong approach entirely because it treats people differently. I’m in favor of the fair tax but I’d also support a flat tax system if it meant the end of the monstrosity we call the tax code.
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
londonfog said:
oops dude I was using my smart phone and typing on another post but then went to your post and was going to comment about OSHA, but my phone was freezing up and the same post I posted elsewhere showed up on you as well...sorry ...but my comment about OSHA was do you realize how many lives they have saved in the aircraft industry...again that other post was not meant for you...one reason why I hate posting from my phone..weird shit happens..
Click to expand...
Cool man.
I think OSHA has saved lives as well. I think some of the regs. are complete bullshit but most of them have improved working conditions
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
canndo said:
Do you really think it is the tax rate that has corporations jump ship? Hardly, it has to do with what they are forced to pay for labor. If they can get their products made by people they pay 18 cents an hour they will do so. We in this country will never work for such low wages and so no matter what their tax incentive is, they will not return to this country.
Click to expand...
There is no doubt in my mind taxes play a part in a company’s decisions. They don’t operate in a vacuum and every cent they can save they will. Labor cost is just one piece of the pie. Transportation cost are going to start killing global companies and if the USA offered a better business environment I think more companies would come back and we might even pick up some new international businesses.
 
mame

mame

Well-Known Member
BudMcLovin said:
Of course I think taxing income is the wrong approach entirely because it treats people differently. I’m in favor of the fair tax but I’d also support a flat tax system if it meant the end of the monstrosity we call the tax code.
Click to expand...
A progressive tax system is needed in a democracy to prevent oligarchy. Many people assert that America already is ran by the corporations... A flat tax would make that worse(this is the same reasoning for certain taxes like the estate tax). They dont really seem fair to the rich guy but it's meant as a check on the power of the wealthy elite. This isn't only true in the U.S... all Democracies impose a progressive tax system.
Transportation cost are going to start killing global companies and if the USA offered a better business environment I think more companies would come back and we might even pick up some new international businesses.
Click to expand...
Lowering the tax rate and closing loopholes would be a step towards this (both Obama and Ryan include this idea in their plans).
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
mame said:
A progressive tax system is needed in a democracy to prevent oligarchy. Many people assert that America already is ran by the corporations... A flat tax would make that worse(this is the same reasoning for certain taxes like the estate tax). They dont really seem fair to the rich guy but it's meant as a check on the power of the wealthy elite. This isn't only true in the U.S... all Democracies impose a progressive tax system.
Click to expand...
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one. I’ve been down that drain way to many times on here and noone ever changes their mind.:joint:
 
R

redivider

Well-Known Member
the environment for business in the US is one of the best in the world.

the thing is greedy motherfuckers convinced us about how much better it would be if they're allowed to outsource production.... DE-REGULATE!!!!
 
M

MediMarij

Active Member
To compare historical figures to present day is absurd. The variables that need to be controls are 1. World Population 2. US population 3. Cost of Defense/person 4. Cost of SS/per person 5. Cost of X/person ect ect ect. No-one will be able to solve the problems over night. The easiest way to save ourselves over the term(20-30 years) cut Defense spending to what the World averages
US 687,105,000,000/308,745,538(2010 est)= $2225 per person per year
China 114,300,000,000/1,338,612,968= $85 per person per year
France 61,285,000,000/65,312,249=$938 per person per year
4 United Kingdom 57,424,000,000 / 62,698,362= $915
5 Russia 52,586,000,000 /138,739,892=$379 6 Japan 51,420,000,000 /126,475,664=$406 7 Germany 46,848,000,000 /81,471,834=$575 8 Saudi Arabia 42,917,000,000 /26,131,703=$1642 9 Italy 38,198,000,000 /61,016,804=$626

to mention the collateral damage (Deaths, vets long term Health-care, ect)

So if we spend what China contributes 308,745,538 x $85 = 26,362,821,694.55
687,105,000,000-26,362,821,694= 660,742,178,305 per year

Well that will never happen!!

Current deficit
/660,742,178,305= 21.6 years to be debt free WTF

Time to defend us here but not by fighting over there!
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
I think that because the rich benefit more from this country,it's laws, it's infrastructure and it's government, that they should pay more. I think that because their average tax rate after loopholes and deductions is something between 7 and 15 percent while the poorer pay as much as 30, they should be taxed more. I think as someone else was mentioning, that the basis of taxation is taking a man's life from him. He spends a portion of his working time not benefiting himself but his government. If that is the case and it is, then if one man gets $1000 dollars an hour in his profession and another gets $20, then the rich guy owes a thousand and the poor one twenty. The lower 40 percent pay all sorts of taxes, they just don't pay federal income tax.
Click to expand...
The rich pay those taxes too in proportion to what they make. You think rich people don't pay sales tax, house tax, ect? Also, the very premise of 7 to 15% is wrong. If anyone bothered to look at the compilation of tax by the IRS that I posted a few times they would see even the ultra rich average more than 15% just in federal taxes. Not counting the other taxes they pay. Overall, everyone who makes over 200,000 pays a little over 20%. The poor on average pay much less. I personally don't think anyone should get deductions. These are only fed #'s. You should check out the official numbers:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en&hl=en&key=0AjrKFiusfAd9dHZuSWExS2RBNF8wei1WZmgyTG1yWkE&output=html

This is just the rich, and it is on a webpage so you dont need anything to view it.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08in11si.xls

This is from the IRS.gov site, official #'s for all tax payers and their average rate %.
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
has anyone answered the topic question yet
Click to expand...
No, because the simple answer is there is no proof that anything works and there are no guidelines given as to what is considered to be working. Society started out Libertarian. IE: No rules, and if you didn't like the way things ran, you left, and did your own thing. The government wasn't strong enough to keep people there without their voluntary agreement to it. No one had any real control over you without your agreement. However, the 'government' in place at the start would of been conservative. IE: Family groups with a father/leader controlling it based on tradition. I would have to say it depends on what you consider to be a successful society. What country has been liberal long enough to actually claim to be successful? Not America, we have only been around a few hundred years. None of the socialist/communist/progressive/other European countries have been around in their current state for very long.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
No, because the simple answer is there is no proof that anything works and there are no guidelines given as to what is considered to be working. Society started out Libertarian. IE: No rules, and if you didn't like the way things ran, you left, and did your own thing. The government wasn't strong enough to keep people there without their voluntary agreement to it. No one had any real control over you without your agreement. However, the 'government' in place at the start would of been conservative. IE: Family groups with a father/leader controlling it based on tradition. I would have to say it depends on what you consider to be a successful society. What country has been liberal long enough to actually claim to be successful? Not America, we have only been around a few hundred years. None of the socialist/communist/progressive/other European countries have been around in their current state for very long.
Click to expand...
ummm you are so wrong...another thread was started
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/422497-wheres-proof-librulism-works.html but we guess people was showing the answer so the OP left it..if you like I can bump it up for ya...
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
The rich pay those taxes too in proportion to what they make. You think rich people don't pay sales tax, house tax, ect? Also, the very premise of 7 to 15% is wrong. If anyone bothered to look at the compilation of tax by the IRS that I posted a few times they would see even the ultra rich average more than 15% just in federal taxes. Not counting the other taxes they pay. Overall, everyone who makes over 200,000 pays a little over 20%. The poor on average pay much less. I personally don't think anyone should get deductions. These are only fed #'s. You should check out the official numbers:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en&hl=en&key=0AjrKFiusfAd9dHZuSWExS2RBNF8wei1WZmgyTG1yWkE&output=html

This is just the rich, and it is on a webpage so you dont need anything to view it.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08in11si.xls

This is from the IRS.gov site, official #'s for all tax payers and their average rate %.
Click to expand...


I didn't say that the rich didn't pay those taxes as well, I said that the poor DO pay taxes. The rich do not pay in proportion to what they make with regard to sales tax, they pay in proportion to what they spend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top