Bucaro Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Lower and middle class make up for more than 80%, my friend. And they still pay the lion share of taxes in this country. Shall we squeeze more blood from the radish? I assume by "they" you mean the upper class. If you knew ANYTHING about economics (as you seem to believe by quoting high school eco), then you would know it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be any other way because of the level of inequity in this country which is furthered by the tax breaks you are advocating (and those great GB tax cuts for the rich). Your opinions and principals seem to be in opposition with each other in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Both payments seem relatively liquid to me ...$1 of a tax break to Exxon will go to pay an employee, buy some equipment, maybe get paid out in a dividend ... the employee, contractor, or shareholder who gets that dollar will spend it somewhere, it might get paid again as taxes, and out again as a tax break... $1 to a welfare mom will be spent at the supermarket or maybe for bus fare, and that money will similarly be spent somewhere in the open market, maybe even at a gas station where it will make its way to Exxon. The money doesn't go from Exxon to the mom. The money travels from Exxon's pocket to the government, hangs out there for a while, then it goes to the mom and back to Exxon. That process could take months or years. At best, the money takes extra time to get back to Exxon. At worst, it goes to Texaco instead. Exxon can count on that first $1 when it's making its financial decisions. The second $1 it can't. That $1 may make the difference between expanding or shutting down a plant. At best, Exxon gives the government an interest free loan that it pays off in X months. No matter what Exxon loses some money in the deal, even if it's only the interest the money would make sitting in a bank. That's still a lot when you're dealing with billions, and it could be a lot more if they are aggressive in investing it in themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Aren't you curtailing the entire subject. If the trickle down doesn't actually create more money for the middle and bottom but just stays at the top, that's not much of a trickle is it? People have to make what other people buy. Thus the opportunity for people in this country. Make stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 People have to make what other people buy. Thus the opportunity for people in this country. Make stuff. How does that work in an economy like we have where it appears that corporations have received their biggest tax breaks ever (from what little I understand) and still have layed people off or at least not created new jobs. What gets made in the U.S.A anymore? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Aren't you curtailing the entire subject. If the trickle down doesn't actually create more money for the middle and bottom but just stays at the top, that's not much of a trickle is it? What do you mean by the top? The rich or the corporations? There's a huge difference, and it's key when talking about trickle down economics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 What do you mean by the top? The rich or the corporations?There's a huge difference, and it's key when talking about trickle down economics. Please explain the difference in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I have a BS in econ too. Guess what the S stands for? You know what's funny? I misspoke. My Econ degree is a BA, my Neuro degree is a BS. You can't honestly pretend that it's anything remotely resembling a hard science. In your intro class when they gave you your list of assumed behaviors, and the concept of rational actors, a light should have gone off in your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Here's a Predicto prediction: I don't think this thread is going to go well. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: well he is comparing apples to oranges :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 How does that work in an economy like we have where it appears that corporations have received their biggest tax breaks ever (from what little I understand) and still have layed people off or at least not created new jobs. What gets made in the U.S.A anymore? :whoknows: I was thinking Reaganomics 80s. This is where the opportunity is in 2008... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I'll say this: like most libertarians, I oppose ALL welfare. Corporate welfare included. If you can't make it w/o gov't help, too bad :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Oil companies, though most people think they are "evil" provide a much needed commodity to society. Not sure what is so hard to grasp.On the other hand, they certainly dont need $18 billion in tax breaks over the next 12 years. But since that is already factored into the price of gas, its coming out of your pocket one way or the other.......unless you stop buying their product. Good luck with that. What i dont understand is why people hate the american oil companies and not OPEC. OPEC is the monopoly that keeps the price artificially inflated. Bingo!!!!! A lot of the tax breaks for oil companies though is supposed to be used towards research and developments on new methods for alternative fuels. There is a big push right now on geothermal energy and other types. This is being brought to the forefront by some of these oil companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I assume by "they" you mean the upper class. If you knew ANYTHING about economics (as you seem to believe by quoting high school eco), then you would know it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be any other way because of the level of inequity in this country which is furthered by the tax breaks you are advocating (and those great GB tax cuts for the rich). Your opinions and principals seem to be in opposition with each other in this thread High school econ? lol. name another..... You can give tax cuts to the rich because they pay taxes. You can not, however, give the poor a tax cut. The proper term is "handout". And quite unamerican if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I'll say this: like most libertarians, I oppose ALL welfare. Corporate welfare included. If you can't make it w/o gov't help, too bad :2cents: then you must also oppose regulation so you don't mind if companies screw the normal citizen :doh: remember this is why we had the tech boom and now the subprime crisis, banks doing what they want i like an open system but am fully aware there are major consequences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I wish I had gotten in on this thread in the beginning. Trying to catch up is probably pointless. So in Chomerics bizarro-world, someone who collects welfare contributes as much to society as a multi-billion dollar corporation that employees 100k people. Good question. Can't say I know the answer. Does that make them any less worthy as a person? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I'll say this: like most libertarians, I oppose ALL welfare. Corporate welfare included. If you can't make it w/o gov't help, too bad :2cents:Tell that to a lot of farmers.Although, a lot of them also abuse subsidies too.:2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I wish I had gotten in on this thread in the beginning. Trying to catch up is probably pointless.Does that make them any less worthy as a person? no, not at all, but they need to be seperate they are not the same now if chom were to say one rich person and one poor person then he might have something but to compare them to a company, he needs to lay off the herba mala Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Tell that to a lot of farmers.Although, a lot of them also abuse subsidies too.:2cents: Ugh, the farm subsidy program is so screwed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Please explain the difference in this case. The rich is the bloodsucking CEO that had absolutely nothing to do with building the corporation from the ground up, but demands tens of millions to run the company after it's already boomed into a huge corporation. And still gets a golden parachute even if the company gets run into the ground. The corporation is the entity that creates hundreds of jobs and generates billions of new wealth for the economy of this country. One gets taxed through individual income tax. The other gets taxed through corporate income tax. If you tax one, that's one less Porsche in the driveway. If you tax the other, that's one less job for the economy. If you tax one, that's not going to stop him from trying to earn extra money for himself. If you tax the other, it might get scared and decide to sit on its money instead of expanding itself. In other words, one not only does trickle down, but it's the source. The other is just another person sucking on the teet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefBigMeat Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Can someone help me come to grips with this conundrum? Is it just greed that goes through people's mind? Why is one side good and the other bad? One word: Racism Since 1964, the Republican strategy has been to frame Democrats as 'those who want to take your money and give it to someone who isn't white.' After the Civil Rights era, the South went to red from blue -- all the while using language like 'lazy' and 'freeloaders' to spread the lingering resentment from Way back in the Reconstruction era, with the added benefit of deflecting scorn from their big-business friends they are in bed with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 yes it's a damn joke.... relax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 The rich is the bloodsucking CEO that had absolutely nothing to do with building the corporation from the ground up, but demands tens of millions to run the company after it's already boomed into a huge corporation. And still gets a golden parachute even if the company gets run into the ground.. Ok, I am not trying to defend all CEO's but do feel they get a bad rap at times. All I am going to say is at the level I am at and what I know many CEO's do great things for their companies. Now there are some scum but you find it everywhere, and on every level. Some CEO's do get huge money, however if they increase the company by x percentage then at times they are worth it. The other point I would make is many feel they don't do anything, which is far from the truth. I know people that are seriously working 15 hours a day, everyday but don't ***** about it, they love it. It is their life and their passion which is why there are so many great CEO's out there. The average worker has a life, many top executives have no life, which is why the divorce rate is I think like 65 to 70%. It isn't easy being on top as many here feel it is. Money does not buy happiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 One word: RacismSince 1964, the Republican strategy has been to frame Democrats as 'those who want to take your money and give it to someone who isn't white.' After the Civil Rights era, the South went to red from blue -- all the while using language like 'lazy' and 'freeloaders' to spread the lingering resentment from Way back in the Reconstruction era, with the added benefit of deflecting scorn from their big-business friends they are in bed with. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Just what are these $18 billion tax breaks? Encouraging the private investment of billions in exploration,production and more refining capacity....All of which is taxed(and royalties paid on crude production) and produces products that are taxed and employs workers that are taxed....and all as the result of paying slightly lower tax Do you see a theme here? You think prices are high now?...let the foreign producers and refiners have a monopoly. I would love to see more competition for big oil,but not many have billions of dollars to play with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 The other point I would make is many feel they don't do anything, which is far from the truth. I know people that are seriously working 15 hours a day, everyday but don't ***** about it, they love it. It is their life and their passion which is why there are so many great CEO's out there. The average worker has a life, many top executives have no life, which is why the divorce rate is I think like 65 to 70%. It isn't easy being on top as many here feel it is. To this I'd like to add that sometimes a person can work 1 hour a week and have that hour be worth millions in compensation. Some people get paid for making decisions or solve problems... It may take a long time to get education/experience/etc to be able to do this, but actually doing it may not take a long time at all. Just wanted to make sure that "working smart" is not lost in the "working hard" point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDSKNfaithfull Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 This thread is a good read. I'm sitting here wondering why the OP hasn't chimed in yet after seven pages :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.