Why is it always about cutting costs? Why not go for raising revenue?

[Stinky The Clown]

Cutting costs involves hurting little people. It ALWAYS does, whether it is layoffs at a jobsite or cuts in government programs.

Raising revenues is almost always the better choice. The problem is, it is harder to do. Not impossible. Just harder.

When Ford was on the ropes, back in the 80s, they bet the farm on the Taurus/Sable. That was hard work. That was a huge risk. But it paid off.

The answer today is to raise revenue. Taxes are not inherently a bad thing. A good part of the problem today is a near criminal lack of revenue.

Yeah, I know ....... and I don't care.

Tax the shit out of the wealthy. Tax them until they scream. The banksters, just as one group, are getting BONUSES equal to 1% of the fucking GDP. Tax them to confiscatory rates.

Tax the fuck out of people who live (well) off of passive income, too. Not some widow who is clipping a few coupons to maintain her 30 year old mobile home in a north Florida trailer park. But I AM talking about the wealthy who we love to call the investor class and who add NOT ONE FUCKING THING to society.

So, until we start enhancing revenue, I am opposed to cutting costs.

[texastoast]

1. Check out Pink Floyd's lyrics on Money

It's the American mindset, especially for the wealthy. As long as capitalism is worshipped here . . .

[JuniperLea]

16. I've always said...

Anything you ever needed to know can be found in the rock, and in the roll...

"Money" is spot freaking on!

[texastoast]

38. To bad the pukes think that "Happy people don't need art"

I read that at FR. To a round of moranic applause. Ewww. We will NOT let those people take over again.

[JuniperLea]

43. Are you series?

Them be some idjits! Idjits jes dont unnerstan art! Morans.

Ignorance is bliss... that's why they think they are happy. Only advanced civilizations enjoy art... Freepers are known to be less advanced than prehistoric cave dwellers, and this proves it!

[Kerrytravelers]

2. I'm not at all wealthy, but I'd pay a bit more if I knew the funds would keep schools open,

offer health care for all, fund welfare programs that support single mothers so they can complete an education and secure employment, pay for people to get an education, etc.

[gateley]

3. A lot of people can't afford more taxes. Why can't we take back the jobs

we've sent overseas, begin manufacturing some of the stuff we used to manufacture here, have equitable trade agreements?

[Zoeisright]

6. Oh please. The wealthy can afford more taxes.

Set the bar at an income of $5,000,000 a year. Don't tell me those people can't pay another 10% of their income to the government.

[gateley]

21. Editing my snarky response to Zoe -- I didn't catch the wealthy reference in the OP.

When I express concern for people, it's for the masses -- people like us, not the wealthy.

It's got to be more than just raising taxes. We need to fix a lot that's gone wrong over the past several years.

But I'd certainly support those wealthy people paying more as we're getting things rectified, and I'd even go for it if I were one of them.

[arthritisR_US]

36. from your fingertips to the dumbasses in government eyes!!! n/t

[Luciferous]

10. I agree with you about the trade agreements and bringing back

jobs, but the OP was about taxing the wealthy.

[gateley]

22. Oops -- didn't catch the "wealthy" part. I knee-jerked. It's my MO, sadly. nt

[Stinky The Clown]

12. I'm not suggesting taxing a lot of people.

I'm suggesting we tax the RICH.

People earning more than 250K, let's say.

People who are social parasites, with the low taxes they pay on their inherited wealth tantamount to subsidizing their slug like fucking lives.

[gateley]

24. Yeah, my fault, Stinky. I missed that in the OP, but several people have

enlightened me. :7 Sorry. And I agree, by the way.

[Stinky The Clown]

26. Hehehe ....

..... you're talking to another knee-jerker.

Its all good!

:hug:

[alstephenson]

15. Why can't we do all of this?

"A lot of people can't afford more taxes" - yeah, well a lot of people CAN afford more taxes.

[dysfunctional press]

28. it's not just the jobs that went overseas...it was the assembly lines as well...

a LOT of the factories cannot simply be 're-opened', because there's nothing in them...the machinery was sold as well.

[gateley]

33. I didn't hope that it would be that easy (but wouldn't it be nice?) but it CAN

be done. We need to do what it takes.

[dysfunctional press]

44. what it's going to take, more than anything- is time.

the jobs didn't disappear overnight, ad it will take even longer for them to return, if ever...:shrug:

[gateley]

46. Agree. One step at a time. I hope we move in that direction. nt

[dhpgetsit]

34. The top margin is above 250K

If you seriously think they can't afford to pay more taxes you need a brain transplant.

To balance the budget and pay down the debt, and make the investments in infrastructure we need, we need to raise taxes on the top margin to about 75%, raise capital gains taxes, impose a Securities Exchange Transaction Tax (STET), and reimpose the inheritance tax for large inheritances.

We also need to slash the Pentagon's budget.

[Zoeisright]

4. Exactly. There's plenty of money out there. Concentrated at the top.

NOBODY needs to make $10 million a year. That's just obscene, especially when people are dying because they don't have enough money.

[slackmaster]

5. Raising revenue hurts people too

Raising peoples' taxes has the unintended effect of invalidating peoples' long-term budgets. It's hard enough to run a budget when you know in advance how much you are going to pay in taxes.

[dhpgetsit]

29. OK, put down the kool-aid and take a few steps back.

From the 30s through the 70s the rate on the top margin was over 50%, 90% during the DDE administration. And the economy grew at a nice steady pace, no major bank fiasco for decades.

Reagan cut taxes and began spending like a drunken sailor, ballooning the deficit and immediately triggered a sharp recession. Real wages for working families flattened out while the rich enjoyed cuts in capital gains and inheritance taxes. Now wealth is so tightly concentrated we live in what some are calling economic feudalism.

I say tax the top margin at about 75%, impose a Securities Exchange Transaction Tax, regulate the banks and investment brokers, and get back to the economy that allows the middle class to grow again.

[slackmaster]

30. In order: So what, so what, and I don't really care what the top margin rate is.

I'm writing from the perspective of a working professional middle-class middle-aged divorced empty-nester homeowner who lives in California. I think I pay more than my fair share of taxes already.

If you want to tax the uber-rich, you won't get any argument from me.

[dhpgetsit]

37. Cons have done a great job getting people to believe that

returning to pre-Reagan tax rates will cause pain for the middle class. It's hogwash.

[slackmaster]

48. I didn't know the thread was about returning to pre-Reagan tax rates

Nobody has been very specific about who would get taxed more for the benefit of whatever.

[renegade000]

7. we should have a "war effort" tax

If we're truly at "war". Maybe requiring future military action be tied with taxes is a good way of getting the public to think about if we really need to be engaged in a conflict.

[donco6]

13. I agree with this.

When people realize war isn't "free", (and aren't they always telling us 'freedom isn't free'?) then maybe they'll think twice about banging the drums.

[me b zola]

8. I agree

Today I voted for taxing the wealthy and large corporations here in Oregon. I sure hope that measures 66 &67 pass, it will show the way federally on how to do it.


:kick:

[JI7]

9. tax raises always get a bad response from people

and then you have idiots who start complaining about people on welfare.

in CAlifornia Whitman is running ads complaining about people on welfare.

it's the same with immigration.

some things or people are just easier to blame.

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. They only complain because it should be them that are being taxed. And of course,

when the right-wing warns about tax-rises, they believe they are a protected species. It's ufortunate that people should reflexively associate tax-rises with their own pay-packets, as if tax-rises and taxes, in general, were wrong in principle! Who they are levied on is all-important.

[katandmoon]

11. K&R

[Warpy]

14. The wealthy are paying the lowest taxes they ever have right now

and they still scream about them, so we might as well give them something to scream about.

I agree that taxes need to be confiscatory on the highest incomes and act as a disincentive to greed. We also need to even out salaries by subsidizing marginal workers so that they are no longer so far below the poverty line that they're homeless.

Taxes on the richest will help considerably, but the only way to get this country's fiscal house in order is to cut military spending drastically, 10% per year until our spending is in line with what the rest of the world spends.

If you think the rich will scream about higher taxes, wait until they start to lose Empire.

However, if the country is to survive, both things must be done.

[arthritisR_US]

52. all great points! Cutting military spending, start with the private contractors/thieves. n/t

[amborin]

17. windfall tax on the obscene bonuses!

[arthritisR_US]

53. absof*ckinglutely!! n/t

[Uncle Joe]

18. Kicked and recommended, one of your best O.Ps. and an obvious solution to many problems.

Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Stinky.:thumbsup:

[arthritisR_US]

54. ditto! n/t

[HeresyLives]

19. I'm guessing it's your history.

Tea got tossed into Boston harbor because of a tax, and Americans have been death on taxes ever since.

[blindpig]

20. Wealth tax

and tax capital gains at the same rate as income.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

23. The system is broke.

I'm personally not a fan of dumping more resources into a broken system as a solution.
Cutting spending demands an increase in efficiency (repairing the system) to deliver results.
Increasing budget/revenue to marginalize system inadequacies is nothing more than looking the other way.

Likewise, this isn't the 30's where you can just tax the living shit out the business class to prop up social programs until recession subsides. Given the modern global economy, the people with money will take their ball and leave... move operations to other countries that support their habits and use NAFTA as the red carpet to parade their merchandise back in. This has been seen time and time again with millionaires setting up "residence" in lax stats and American businesses building manufacturing plants in other nations.

[Uncle Joe]

35. You can only cut spending so far before efficiency is reduced.

Tax rates on the top earners have almost continuously decreased, while defense spending has grown to astronomical levels eating up the budget, those are the primary reasons the system is broke. Our mega-wealthy and their corporations have failed to live within the nation's taxable, sustainable means, if they have no more loyalty to the nation; that incubated their rise, let them leave and the United States will be all the wealthier for the corrected system.

[inna]

25. It seems so obvious, doesn't it. Too bad the system is rigged. KR

[dhpgetsit]

27. Seriously!

And when talking about cutting costs, why is the Pentagon such a fucking Holy Cow? We spend more on military then the rest of the world combined! FFS!

[madinmaryland]

31. I just saw our county exec talking about "cuts" to the budget on the news. Checkout

Channel 11 at 6:00 for more info. If you don't see it, I'll let you know what he wants to cut.

I'm sure it will not be tax breaks for the banksters.

[Stinky The Clown]

39. Let me guess ..... Harford? Cecil?

[madinmaryland]

41. Howard.

Apparently the mandatory week furlough for county employees, and other nitpicky shit is what he cut.

My last sentence should have read: "I'm sure the cuts will not include the tax breaks for the corporations."

Can't have them pay there fair share now can we.

:mad:

[hack89]

40. Upside down pyramids tend to fall over

if you depend on fewer and fewer people to fund your programs, what happens when a recession reduces their income? Or they decide not to play any more and give away their money to their alma mater? Or leave the country?

The rich have other options besides just "screaming".

[PA Democrat]

42. I hear you. We should also look at corporate tax revenues

which are at the lowest level (as a percentage of GDP) since WWII.

Consider these little factoids on Goldmann Sachs for the fiscal year 2008:


$ 2.3 Billion Profit
$ 4.9 Billion Bonuses
$ 14 Million Taxes (worldwide, not just US taxes)
$10 Billion US Taxpayer Bailout

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=a6b...
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/01/07/23425.htm

We bail out their thieving asses and they turn around and pay themselves obscene bonuses, but pay only pittance in taxes. If that's not a glaring example of privatizing the gains and socializing the risks, I don't know what is.

[Edweird]

45. The people that write the laws are rich. They are not going to tax themselves and their friends.

They wouldn't get invited to the 'in' parties anymore.

[rufus dog]

47. When you have waste cutting costs is far more effective

First off the premise that the two are mutually exclusive is false.

Cutting cost is always much better than raising revenue. Cutting costs goes directly to the bottom line while raising revenue requires investment. (Dollar increase in revenue does not go to the bottom line) Remember a dollar saved equals a dollar earned, a dollar of increased revenue doesn't.

Using your car analogy, that is what Japan got and the US didn't. Ford, GM, kept pushing product, providing unlimited options. Honda, Toyota, streamlined production, minimized options. (Taurus more closely matched the Japan model)

So your premise that enhancing revenue before cutting costs is the most beneficial, while uniquely American, is flat out wrong.

[rucky]

49. More jobs = more taxpayers = more revenues

+ less demand for social services & subsidies = cuts

Government runs opposite of commerce to the laws of supply and demand.

In government, when time are good, demand goes down & supply goes up. When times are bad, demand goes up & supply goes down.

[havocmom]

50. Havocdad's plan to improve the economy and increase $ coming into the Treasury:

Send a letter to everyone making under $X dollars a year, and send it next week with cc to IRS:

Greetings Citizen,
Due to the serious economic crisis, you owe no taxes for year 2009. Any federal income tax with held from you payroll over that year will be refunded. You do not have to fill out a monstrous and intentionally intimidating pile of form. Just send your w-2 with the bottom part of this letter and check how you want the money back. We know you have probably been putting off some much needed purchases for your self and/or family. We know some of you REALLY need to make a payment on mortgage or rent to keep a roof over your head while looking for another job. Go for it!
Sincerely, the DEM majority in Congress

There would be no need to put a bunch of mechanisms in place. Just send out the letter with a tear off bottom and make that the 1040 for the less than rich class.


And then, of course, Havocdad wants another letter going out to everyone making over $XX:

Hey, all you guys who so revere Reagan? Guess what? We are giving you Reagan! You now have to pay the tax rate you did when St. Ronnie was the boss.

Havocdad said nothing will stimulate the economy faster than giving the bottom tier their with holdings back. It WILL go into circulation. That WILL set other spending AND HIRING into motion. More hires = more workers paying taxes in the coming year(s). The money moves around that way. Sending $ to the top tier is NOT good for the economy. They horde. They have not been re-investing IN AMERICA. And they can fucking well start paying more in taxes for all the perks they get for being in the class that pulls all the strings.

Oh, and stop spending money on that god damned war!

Then Havocdad went to look at LOL cats.

[cascadiance]

51. The State of Oregon said this last night. Obama! Are you listening?!!!

[tranche]

55. If we raise taxes one fraction of one percent we all die.

Reagan told me so.


Honestly, people just don't trust government anymore. That's a big problem with raising tax rates. Government has gotten so gobbed up, people don't see it as doing any good anyways. I think it's a culture thing, but without effective governance from all levels people will continue to resist and that simple argument of "no new taxes" will always win.