# If The Tea Party Was Actually Serious **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 15, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250 "2010-10-15T15:37:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/161 "2010-10-18T01:57:25Z")
Rich own property. Property? 1. Farms, wells, bodies of water, mines–the land. Under somebody’s sovereignty, unless it’s an ocean fishery or something. 2. Factories, processing plants, rendering plants, kitchens, restaurants–still on land somewhere, not many on ships. Some could be moved, but at some expense. 3. Airports, stadia, convention centers–location dependent, not moving. 4. Warehouses, hangars–still on land for the most part. Movable, but the resources to maintain aren’t everywhere & Third World low-tax countries are known for crime. Proles are by definition not bound to land. That’s what makes them not serfs. They go where the jobs are, but don’t pay for the property & infrastructure. Q E D ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/162 "2010-10-18T02:03:25Z")
And if you want to make stuff in one country and sell it in another, that probably means shipping. Who provides the weather forecast to keep ships from sailing into storms? Who rescues sailors, goes after pirates, dredges harbors,… ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/163 "2010-10-18T04:07:59Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > So the question is, are we losing the business of foreigners who would relocate to the USA, become resident aliens, & hire workers here rather than in China or in Vietnam? > > Yes, we are. Not because of taxes on the capital–but because of the taxes & other expenses on the workers. China doesn’t tax its workers as much as we do. Your argument is turning into an argument for lowering taxes on the proles–which would be \*progressive.\*So you now admit your argument is crap. Good. Single data point… A friend of mine owns a small business in Canada, and has always been very enamored of the United States. Years ago (just after the tax cuts were put in place as a matter of fact), he looked into moving his business south of the border. Thought he’d take advantage of the lower taxes, and lead a better life. Once he looked into it and crunched the numbers, he saw that it was pointless. His personal taxes would have been less, yes… but not that much lower. He particularly worried about the cost of healthcare coverage, both for his family and for any workers that he’d hire. The cost to get his family covered would haver pretty much wiped out any tax advantage for him personally. He felt that he’d need to cover his workers in order to get good people - that additional cost would have meant that he’d be paying his workers much more in the US than in Canada. He didn’t move the business. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/164 "2010-10-18T05:44:42Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I used the chart showing the ranges and picked the median of each range. In the first range a 5% increase would be $1,751 increase or $33/week. .05\*(70,040/2). I agree that 3% indexing sounds high for the bracket changes but if that moves the brackets up and wages remain the same then it works in our favor. I don’t think your math works (and as it turns out, neither does mine). Here are the 2010 numbers: 10% Bracket $0 – $16,750 15% Bracket $16,750 – $68,000 The median household income is 50K, the AGI will be a lot lower but lets just assume the AGI is also 50K. Their tax bill will be $1675 (10% of their first $16,750) plus $5988 (15% of ($50,000-$16750)) for a grand total of $6663. In 2011 the rate will just be 15% on the entire thing or $7500. About an $837 difference. I guess my $500 guess was $337 low but your guess is $914 too high. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/165 "2010-10-18T05:45:45Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Oh the horror. Where were the protests then and where are the protests now when it was reintroduced? You weren’t around here when it happened were you? I protested it as the stupidest tax cuts in modern history. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/166 "2010-10-18T05:46:59Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Nope. They tried to get it passed as it was. Democrats wanted to screw the rich. Then what do you mean by saying that the Democrats tried to extend it. IF the Democrats tried to extend it before the summer recess, then why the fuck didn’t it pass? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/167 "2010-10-18T05:52:18Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > It wasn’t meant to be funny. You can’t tax a country back into prosperity because the wealthy are not bound to the land. They are free to move their money and the jobs that go with it elsewhere. You can’t even get Democratic leaders like Geitner or Kerry to pay their taxes unless the light of day is shown on them. Their ability to generate income is bound to the land. The Fabrice Tourre’s of the world would never make that sort of money anywhere else in the world. Geithner was a mistake. Obama should have asked him to step down. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/168 "2010-10-18T05:53:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If it was the same tax rate as before then Republicans would have voted it in. So the Republicans torpedoed the extension of the tax cuts for 98% of Americans because the bill left out the extension for the top 2%. Well at least they know which side their bread is buttered on. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/169 "2010-10-18T05:55:07Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > because the rich are not bound to the soil and will take their money elsewhere. Chasing money and jobs out of the country is bad during a recession. If Democrats thought it was a good idea they could have rammed it through. They didn’t. No they won’t. They always threaten to leave but they didn’t leave when Clinton raised taxes and they won’t leave when Obama does it either. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/170 "2010-10-18T05:56:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > They would go to places where they can earn more money. They haven’t all left because one of the variables on earning money are tax rates and 9 years ago those were lowered. Tax rates can be personal income or local taxes. If you haven’t noticed, cities compete for businesses by lowering various tax rates. And where exactly would that be? You think business would follow the Farbice Tourre’s of the world to Nevis? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/171 "2010-10-18T05:59:33Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Then let me ask the question again. Why didn’t _all_ the rich people leave prior to 2001, when taxes were higher than they are now? Perhaps they all came flooding back when the rates were dropped. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/172 "2010-10-18T06:00:45Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > First of all, I haven’t said I favor raising taxes. There are good reasons to argue for keeping the tax code as is for now. Fearmongering about people leaving the country isn’t one of those reasons. Yeah but its the only one that they understand. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/173 "2010-10-18T06:02:04Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > No. We had a balanced budget before with a surplus and we can do it again. Yeah but our taxes were also higher then. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/174 "2010-10-18T15:28:49Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > When you say ‘pet project’ are you referring to that nutty scheme of reducing our zillion-dollar national debt (sometimes called the “Buy Back Our Nation From China” scheme)? No, I mean these types of “pet projects” : [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/11/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4792749.shtml](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/11/politics/otherpeoplesmoney/main4792749.shtml) Also, I guess to be perfectly honest with myself, I don’t mind paying taxes (for some things) and abhor paying them for others but we have got to get the government’s mindset away from ‘oh look we have a deficit, raise taxes’ We need to be of the mindset (like so many of you have pointed out) of figuring out a cost effective way of paying for something before we spend the money. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/175 "2010-10-18T15:34:49Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > We need to be of the mindset (like so many of you have pointed out) of figuring out a cost effective way of paying for something before we spend the money. We had such a law when Clinton balanced the budget. Republicans got rid of PAYGO as part of the scheme to cut taxes without balancing the budget, and look what happened. Thank goodness that Democrats have reinstated the law, right? ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/176 "2010-10-18T16:06:29Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > We had such a law when Clinton balanced the budget. Republicans got rid of PAYGO as part of the scheme to cut taxes without balancing the budget, and look what happened. > > Thank goodness that Democrats have reinstated the law, right? Are you honestly so blindly partisan that you can’t see I don’t give a shit who did what when? I want to see it fixed but you are so damn set in your Dem= Good, Pub = Bad mindset that everything remotely conservative sets off your spider sense. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/177 "2010-10-18T16:38:28Z")
Erhm, I’m not really sensing that you are giving Democrats any credit for restoring the law that you advocate. And although I am a Democrat, I have no problem defending Republicans against purely political attacks. For example, I have consistently opposed the liberal talking point that Bush lied about WMD in Iraq. However, in this case, Republicans have no claim whatsoever to fiscal responsibility. Why anyone would think that putting Republicans in charge of Congress would improve things is beyond explanation to me. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/178 "2010-10-18T16:43:45Z")
Ravenman, I haven’t said a thing about putting any particular party in charge of anything and that is where our disconnect is. About Pay-go, I would definitely need more time to see how it directly affects the outcome of certain bills. For example, would it have affected the ‘war on terror’ funding? How about the health care bill? How about ALL of the biggies? Afghanistan war funding? etc ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/179 "2010-10-18T17:56:59Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Are you honestly so blindly partisan that you can’t see I don’t give a shit who did what when? > > I want to see it fixed but you are so damn set in your Dem= Good, Pub = Bad mindset that everything remotely conservative sets off your spider sense. The OP of this thread explicitly asked about the Tea Party which makes it a decidedly political/partisan thread. You may not care but that does not change the gist of this thread. What is clear is that the republicans have a near zero track record in balancing the budget and reducing the deficit. Indeed they have done quite the opposite (as shown earlier). Democrats are not what I would call stellar in this area but they are the only party to actually achieve what the Tea Party is railing about. The Tea Party is long on rhetoric and stunningly short on actual proposals and ideas of how they will do what they claim to want to do. Given the history of the conservatives we have every reason to think they will make things worse in this respect and not better. So yeah, in the end it is a partisan issue and with elections looming particularly so. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250/180 "2010-10-18T18:52:37Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Yeah but our taxes were also higher then. Yep. If there’s a surplus that means they can budget the money better. That was done without actually going after the little stuff. Nobody knows what the perfect tax rate is but the concept of operating within a budget and spending money wisely should be politically universal if not a legal requirement. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-the-tea-party-was-actually-serious/557250.md?page=10)