How Wealth Redistribution Has Broken the Back of America

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by philnotfil, Oct 7, 2013.

  1. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,189
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +885
    I'm all for people keeping more of their money but that's probably not going to happen.....corporations want your money....and they'll get it. They have more money and power than ordinary people do.
  2. philnotfil
    Offline

    philnotfil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    12,609
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +589
    Why all of this defense for corporations paying less in taxes, and all of the vitriol for the 47%?
  3. rpmGator
    Online

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,841
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +676
    Bush in office the top one percent made a killing.

    Obama in office the top one percent made a killing.

    I agree that moving all the money to one percent of the population is hurting America.
  4. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    43,642
    Likes Received:
    948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +3,730
    Person who makes 10K and pays no taxes = leech and user

    Person who makes 1 billion and pays no taxes = producer and good businessman
  5. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,217
    Likes Received:
    502
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,398
    You really don't understand any difference at all between government a) not taking money in the first place, b) taking the money but giving any of it back as a "credit", and c) taking money and dealing it around to whomever, do you?

    (A) isn't redistribution and it isn't corporate welfare. It is government keeping its grubby mitts off.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. HallGator
    Online

    HallGator Administrator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    43,642
    Likes Received:
    948
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Outer Limits
    Ratings Received:
    +3,730
    In some cases maybe but not when they are given government subsidies or are allowing companies not to pay taxes for incentives. How about price supports?
  7. gatorman_07732
    Online

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,436
    Likes Received:
    2,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +4,389
    You might want to start your argument with a restructuring and simplification of the tax code and then your OP might be more receptive.
  8. philnotfil
    Offline

    philnotfil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    12,609
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +589
    I would love to be able to simplify the tax code. I wish we could put Milton Friedman's plan into action.

    The question still remains, why the defense of one group not paying taxes and the vitriol for another group not paying taxes?
  9. gatorman_07732
    Online

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,436
    Likes Received:
    2,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +4,389
    I'm not sure what you're talking about why the defense of one group not paying taxes. Who isn't paying any taxes to the federal government in the upper income bracket?
  10. oragator1
    Offline

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,776
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,677
    Setting aside the issue of "fairness", the two times in the last 90 years when wealth disparity was at its highest were right before the 1929 crash and right before the 2008 crash. And now it is continuing to rise, we are now at levels not seen since 1916, the end of the robber baron age.
    The issue isn't just one of fairness, without a middle class the economy will fail, because there is no one to buy goods. It's not a coincidence that when our economy was strongest, like in the '50's, we had a prosperous middle class. Right now the middle class is being crushed, real earnings continue to fall while a select few collect and concentrate the wealth. It's not good for society long term, we will become no different than Latin America over time if it continues.
    There are a whole host of reasons this is happening including automation, offshoring, decline of unions etc, but in there as well is tax policy, taxes on the wealthy are at historically low levels. It's a perfect storm for the middle class. It's a problem we have to solve.
  11. OklahomaGator
    Offline

    OklahomaGator Moderator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,958
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Miami, OK
    Ratings Received:
    +2,354
  12. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,189
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +885
  13. OklahomaGator
    Offline

    OklahomaGator Moderator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,958
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Miami, OK
    Ratings Received:
    +2,354
    "The federal government’s proper role in the economy should be that of a neutral referee,
    with intervention limited to facilitating the free exchange of goods and services."

    Nana, the above is a quote from the cato link you cited. Think about that quote and how it would apply to the ACA?
  14. g8orbill
    Offline

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    71,454
    Likes Received:
    4,669
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +9,863
  15. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,810
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +574
    I am all for simplifying the tax code and not spending money on things the government has no business being involved in.

    Which includes removing the redistributive child tax credit and EIC... :whoa:
  16. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,189
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +885
    But what do you think about $100 billion of our tax dollars going to big industries and corporations.....that doesn't include the tax breaks. One of the points of the Cato Institute's report is that this sort of redistribution of wealth is magnifying our financial and economy crisis.
  17. gatornana
    Offline

    gatornana Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    23,189
    Likes Received:
    241
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +885
    Do you believe big industry and corporations are entitled to $100 billion of what we've earned?
  18. gatorman_07732
    Online

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,436
    Likes Received:
    2,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +4,389
    Why did Obama unilaterally give corporations a delay on the ACA mandate and stuck to individuals? This is now the largest tax increase ever all on the backs of the schlubs.
  19. fubar1
    Offline

    fubar1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,435
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +695
    If there is any type of "corporate welfare" or uneven playing field via the tax code, I'm all for straightening it out. As long as it doesn't work against this country's competitive advantage.

    But this debate needs to center on a deeper understanding of corporate taxes, and who exactly pays them. It's a layered discussion, but suffice it to say, only you and me pay those taxes. You and me defined as the common man who pays for goods and services and/or the shareholder of any public company.

    View the issue from this perspective and "corporate" taxes take on a new meaning.
  20. rpmGator
    Online

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,841
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +676
    Thought I saw that the top one percent had over half thr money

    If so, anything less than paying half the taxes would be another reason why too much

    in the hands of too few isnt a good thing.

Share This Page