I tilt toward the list and I said I would personally be willing to do so right here:
Cite? I would like to see proof of this assertion.
Those lucky duckies! Still I don’t think the tax foundation calculated all the benefits that corporations and stock holders get from government investment in infrastructure and National defense spending. I will look at the report later, but I bet they calculate the money received by looking at farm subsidies, Medicaid, welfare, etc… But do they look at the pro-rated benefits to corporations from things like the interstate highway system, law enforcement, stabilized oil prices, Navy protection of shipping in the Strait of Malacca, etc… It seems to me corporations (and the people that own them) get a huge bang for their buck in our national infrastructure and foreign policy adventurism…
Why is it that military spending cuts is not on the table in Republican plan anyway?
I’m merely questioning the characterization: that the rich are “skimming the value off the labor of the poor and sticking it in their own pockets.” Is it that Dude B is doing something of value and not getting a big enough fraction of it – or that his labor really isn’t all that valuable, and you’re glad to explain why?
Of course some people’s labor is more valuable than others. The problem is in how this is decided. It seems some forces want to declare everyone who works for a living to be dumb and unworthy of any reward whatsoever. Nevermind the fact that working people actually make the country function.
What’s behind my characterization is the notion that the system can be set up in such a way that many people get effectively ripped off. We have a $14 trillion economy. A huge percentage of the wealth generated ends up in the hands of the top 5% or 10% of earners. Does anyone really think the value of labor is as disproportionate as the distribution of wealth?
Did you follow Proposition 100 in Arizona, a state that is pretty conservative? Prop 100 was for a 1% sales tax increase that passed with over 64% in favor. Here’s a fox cite for you since I doubt you would take my word for it.
Done nothing? I don’t know what the hell you are talking about. I, and others (including Republicans) have indicated to our government that we would be OK with tax increases. What do you want me to do? I just want to pay my fair share of the programs that congress enacted (note: Congress set the current spending levels, NOT Obama).
I have no problem with a vote on the matter. Just make sure that only those who will have their taxes increased get a vote. Or are you proposing that the 47% who pay no federal income tax should help decide?
Take, say, a barber. Or a short-order cook. Maybe a janitor. I don’t know. Whatever. Name any three you want. Why aren’t they asking for more money in exchange for what they do? Who is ripping them off? How much wealth are they generating?
Possibly I’m picking unfair examples. Cab driver? Bartender? Hotel manager? Who do you have in mind?
I just have this feeling that you are going to come back with the whole conservative meme that all democracies fail when people realize they can vote themselves money. Well, that sure has happened in this country, except it is the wealthy that are voting themselves money, not the poor.
The military industrial complex, a clear example of this, is alive and well. The law enforcement community with their futile and expensive drug war is another. Agriculture, same thing. Insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies, check.
Welfare and Medicaid, not so much. This has been continually cut and chipped away at for decades. It is not a very popular position in this country to give poor people money, even centrists and many liberals think their should be requirements with welfare on job re-training.
Those people in Arizona agreed on a tax that they will all pay…not just some people. It is also, in theory at least, a temporary tax increase.
Your point is that taxpayers will vote for a tax increase? Fine with me. Let those who pay a federal income tax vote on it then. Or, shall we vote on a federal sales tax?
And you would be incorrect. I agree with much of your post. I am no fan of crony capitalism.
I am also in favor saving SS, Medicare and Medicaid. I do think that other welfare programs should be paid for and handled by the states and not from federal grants. That may result in much more focused scrutiny and less abuse.
Not our own. The upper margins of income of those with higher incomes, which does not necessarily mean ours. You’re arguing against the legitimacy of a democratic government to tax. Why?
It is generally the case that democratic governments are considered legitimate, while paying for the privilege to write laws is corruption. Do you dispute this?
I really hope it never comes to a point that citizens are disenfranchised merely because they fail to reach some sort of minimum income. You do realize that’s what you’re proposing, right?
Any chance of heading off this ridiculous hijack now? There’s serious discussion to be had about the specific debt crisis we face, not some generic kooky discussion about how big our erections get from crushing plebes.