Skyteam Airlines to launch CDG-MSP

[Smarta$$]

Bubba, here's a different viewpoint.
I'm in the same tax bracket as you and we are both among the most fortunate in this country. Make no mistake about it we worked hard to get were we are. But most Americans worked just as hard as we have and have not fared as well. The middle class is getting screwed and a small percentage are getting richer and richer. Not because they are smarter, better humans or working harder, but simply a result of circumstances. Life isn't fair, but the republican agenda wants a few to get richer at the expense of the vast majority. They seem to think that's OK. The concept that wealthy people paying less taxes helps anyone but the individuals saving more money is bit of a joke. Lower taxes for the wealthy do not trickle own. I have no problem paying more taxes. It won't change my lifestyle one bit, but if it helps create a more equitable U.S. for my kids to grow up in it would be a good investment.
But the bottom line is you and I have been very fortunate, but not more deserving. I care more about a more equitable country than I care about a few extra tax dollars.
Now that said, here is were you and I will agree....it does piss me off how much money is wasted by our Government, but that's a separate issue that both parties have failed at, and I'm not sure which one is the most guilty.

Great post. Agree with ALL of it.

 

[SWA Bubba]

But you can pretend the poor and regular middle class people have LARGE quantities of taxable investments.... I guess I don't care. What I do care about is this idea that low taxes on the very wealthy will somehow benefit the country or the other 97% of us, which it very clearly doesn't and hasn't.

I can PRETEND? Dude, I did some research because you didn't want to, and your argument basically boils down to "because I said so"?

"Regular" middle class Americans have trillions in mutual funds subject to capital gains taxes. I'm not talking all capital gains income ("like Mitt"), I'm talking mutual funds exclusively, which are designed for the smaller investor. Look it up yourself. Or keep telling yourself it isn't true, because it hurts the image of the President's taxation plans. Your choice.

Bubba

 

[Smarta$$]

Not to rehash the entire political campaign season in one post, but I don't agree with your premises. Rich people currently already pay more in taxes than poor people, both in percentage and in overwhelmingly so in total money (People who earn exclusively from capital gains notwithstanding, but that's not actually very many). The Republicans want to keep from raising that taxation level, not give them a tax reduction. There's more than just a semantic difference between "giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires," and not raising their tax burden even higher. Keep in mind that 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax, and that the top 2% wage earners already pay 50% of everyone's tax, and that the top 10% of earners pays 90% of it. How is that equitable?

However, the primary premise of yours that I disagree with is that the current Administration's kind of plan will do anything to make the country better for future generations. Increasing the role of government (and obviously taxation to pay for it) will only turn the US into another Europe, albeit slowly (the more resistance from conservatives, the more slowly). And as you can see by watching any news channel, Europe is slowly and surely going over a fiscal cliff, one country after another, with the more left-oriented, the faster the fall. The more the central government controls, the less freedoms we have, and the more your "equitability" just becomes equal misery.

Plus, as you say, you hate the money that the government wastes. Don't you think that the more the government has their hand in, that they'll waste even more money?

I know I'm not going to change your mind, and sorry this thread devolved into another political bitchfest, but for you guys on this board who scoff at how pilots in unions can vote for Republicans, this is how.

Bubba

I don't want this to be a partisan post, and I want you to try and read it from a non-election, non-partisan perspective.

The truth is that the federal government is taxing income, as a percentage of GDP at a 60 year low. The taxes are LOWER, right now, on income then they have been in 60 years.

More importantly though, the majority of the super rich in this country, do get the majority of their money from investments, including most CEOs who usually get a small(ish salary and huge stock bonuses. Or hedgefund investors and the Mitt Romney crowd. It is just a non-partisan fact of what our society has become.

Just as important, and something you may not care about or have concerns about, but the wealth gap has been getting ever wider, and middle class wages have been falling. So rich people are getting MUCH richer and poor and middle class are losing the pay and benefits. My point of saying that is not to make an argument about justice and equality, because you are not responsive to those concerns, but YOU MUST UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FINAL EFFECT IS OF THOSE WEALTH INEQUALITY CHANGES ARE TO THE TAX BURDEN DISTRIBUTION OF OUR SOCIETY.

The very wealth inequality trends of the rich getting richer and the poor and middle class falling behind, which are a result of trickle down economic policies and ideologies are THE ROOT CAUSE of the poor and middle class paying a smaller and smaller tax burden, because they don't MAKE ANY MONEY ANYMORE.

When you outsource (sorry I guess Middle Class Mitt prefers the term "offshoring") the jobs that had a living wage and benefits, and leave most Americans with jobs that don't pay a living wage in our "service" economy, the "job creators" have pushed the rest of us into a lower tax bracket, which reduces our tax burden.

All the while, the "offshoring" of our living wage jobs has benefited the Mitt Romney class of citizens in ways we could only dream of, and then they complain about their tax burden..... And you fall for it. This is America's reality. This is why rich pay an ever larger share of taxes and the poor and middle class pay less. It is a function of their own doing, and then they complain when they end up with all of the spoils.

That is why 47% don't pay income taxes, and Mitt Romney's dirty little secret that he forgot to mention in Boca, was that a large proportion of those 47% will vote for him.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Well, I've read this several times, and from a "non-election, non partisan perspective," I see you making circular and bootstap arguments that often have little to do with each other:

I don't want this to be a partisan post, and I want you to try and read it from a non-election, non-partisan perspective.

The truth is that the federal government is taxing income, as a percentage of GDP at a 60 year low. The taxes are LOWER, right now, on income then they have been in 60 years.

These two things are not directly correlative, due to incredible taxation policies of the past (post-WW2 policies of 80-90% tax on income over $1M to pay for the war, rebuilding of Europe, etc.) Also, technological advances further skew the relationship of GDP vs. individual taxation.

More importantly though, the majority of the super rich in this country, do get the majority of their money from investments, including most CEOs who usually get a small(ish salary and huge stock bonuses. Or hedgefund investors and the Mitt Romney crowd. It is just a non-partisan fact of what our society has become.

While that may be true, those numbers of people are very small, and even though they pay only like a 20% effective tax, that's still millions of dollars per year in tax, and a much higher rate than about half of the population. Besides, what has that got to do with jacking MY taxes up? I'm not them. The vast majority of tax revenue that will be generated by these plans will NOT be from the few hundreds of Mitt Romneys in the country, but by the millions of people like me (if I'm in the top 2%, than there's 6 million other Americans who make as much as me). You guys keep using people like Mitt Romney as an example, because it's politically expedient, but the fact of the matter is, this tax increase is squarely aimed at people like us primarily.

Just as important, and something you may not care about or have concerns about, but the wealth gap has been getting ever wider, and middle class wages have been falling. So rich people are getting MUCH richer and poor and middle class are losing the pay and benefits. My point of saying that is not to make an argument about justice and equality, because you are not responsive to those concerns, but YOU MUST UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FINAL EFFECT IS OF THOSE WEALTH INEQUALITY CHANGES ARE TO THE TAX BURDEN DISTRIBUTION OF OUR SOCIETY.

The very wealth inequality trends of the rich getting richer and the poor and middle class falling behind, which are a result of trickle down economic policies and ideologies are THE ROOT CAUSE of the poor and middle class paying a smaller and smaller tax burden, because they don't MAKE ANY MONEY ANYMORE.

This is entirely untrue. The tax burden has always been skewed to the higher earners; it is not the result of any kind of economic policy (recent or otherwise), but rather social policy. It's been this way since LONG before people complained about the "increasing wealth gap." Besides, how does a rich guy paying less taxes make a middle-class guy "fall behind" and earn less (and therefore pay less tax himself)? These things are not correlative. There are dozens of reasons may a guy lose his job or not get a raise or whatever, but his boss paying less tax is not one of them.

When you outsource (sorry I guess Middle Class Mitt prefers the term "offshoring") the jobs that had a living wage and benefits, and leave most Americans with jobs that don't pay a living wage in our "service" economy, the "job creators" have pushed the rest of us into a lower tax bracket, which reduces our tax burden.

Outsourcing jobs happens solely because it's cheaper for the company. That's the bottom line. Ironically, union strength in keeping wages and benefits high in this country incentivizes companies to find cheaper labor if they can. Increasing ANY American's taxes will not even address this, and in fact, if you raise small business taxes too much, they will cease to exist, or look for ways to lower their costs (for example, more outsourcing) if they can. How can any of the President's stated taxation policies help this?

All the while, the "offshoring" of our living wage jobs has benefited the Mitt Romney class of citizens in ways we could only dream of, and then they complain about their tax burden..... And you fall for it. This is America's reality. This is why rich pay an ever larger share of taxes and the poor and middle class pay less. It is a function of their own doing, and then they complain when they end up with all of the spoils.

I'm not falling for crap--YOU seem to be. I know how a capitalist society works. Having the government raise everyone's taxes and provide more and more services turns us into every other society that has tried one form of socialism or another. You seem to be falling in with the crowd that believes the government can take care of everything for everyone.

That is why 47% don't pay income taxes, and Mitt Romney's dirty little secret that he forgot to mention in Boca, was that a large proportion of those 47% will vote for him.

This is probably the silliest thing you said in your post. If it was REALLY true that a large proportion of those 47% will vote for Romney, than he would win by a friggin' landslide. Nobody wants to pay more taxes than they do. If you pay no federal tax, and a candidate says he'll keep it that way by raising taxes on the "rich," than you would vote for him. I believe that's generally how Democrats get elected: they promise low income voters benefits paid for with tax dollars--tax dollars contributed by "rich" people. In WAY too many people's minds, the term "fair share of taxes" really means that I want someone ELSE to pay for it.

Look, this has gone on long enough in this forum. If you want to continue, either PM me or move to a non-aviation forum, please. You asked an open question, I responded, and it's taken a life of its own. Don't take offense, Smarta$$; it's not intended.

Bubba

 

[Smarta$$]

I can PRETEND? Dude, I did some research because you didn't want to, and your argument basically boils down to "because I said so"?

"Regular" middle class Americans have trillions in mutual funds subject to capital gains taxes. I'm not talking all capital gains income ("like Mitt"), I'm talking mutual funds exclusively, which are designed for the smaller investor. Look it up yourself. Or keep telling yourself it isn't true, because it hurts the image of the President's taxation plans. Your choice.

Bubba

As a group of millions of people, yes. As individuals, absolutely not.

 

[Ex737Driver]

The money in mutual funds that is taxable, is significant. It is also OVERWHELMINGLY concentrated in the top 2-3% of households. That does not mean that many average Americans don't have some, they do, have some.

Take mitt Romney. He made 20+ million last year in income, and paid a lower effective tax rate than every pilot on this board. He also never checked in for an assignment or worked a 12 hour duty day like we did. But we got the privilege of working far harder and paying more of our income in taxes than him.

A tax on capital gains would have a small impact on hardworking middle class Americans.

Good God your a libtard. Romney paid taxes on 14% of his "income" last year due to the simple fact he does not receive a regular paycheck like the rest of us. Your hangup on % vs actual dollars is ludicrous. 14% of $21.6 million is $3.04 million. The middle class family making $50,000 AGI paid %15 or $7500. If Romney is smart enough to figure that out, why can't you? Or do you want him to "share the wealth" with you too? You want to the "Romneys'" of America to pay what you see as their "fair share" no questions asked, yet you seem to think that most other Americans are the hard working, down trodden, put-upon middle class that they've been led to believe they are and that they pay way too much to the federal government already. BS. Show me a food stamp recipient in America and I'll show you the same person holding a cell phone, buying designer name clothes, and shopping at Macy's while waiting for Obama care to pay for her check ups so she doesn't have to go to the free clinic. Time to step up and quit laying your blame game on people in America who are successful.

 

[Just thinking]

Just remember to vote.... republicans vote on November 6th.... democrats vote on November 7th............... this avoids any conflict at the polling booths.....

 

[HA25]

Bubba, here's a different viewpoint.
I'm in the same tax bracket as you and we are both among the most fortunate in this country. Make no mistake about it we worked hard to get were we are. But most Americans worked just as hard as we have and have not fared as well. The middle class is getting screwed and a small percentage are getting richer and richer. Not because they are smarter, better humans or working harder, but simply a result of circumstances. Life isn't fair, but the republican agenda wants a few to get richer at the expense of the vast majority. They seem to think that's OK. The concept that wealthy people paying less taxes helps anyone but the individuals saving more money is bit of a joke. Lower taxes for the wealthy do not trickle own. I have no problem paying more taxes. It won't change my lifestyle one bit, but if it helps create a more equitable U.S. for my kids to grow up in it would be a good investment.
But the bottom line is you and I have been very fortunate, but not more deserving. I care more about a more equitable country than I care about a few extra tax dollars.
Now that said, here is were you and I will agree....it does piss me off how much money is wasted by our Government, but that's a separate issue that both parties have failed at, and I'm not sure which one is the most guilty.

I knew I liked you... this is exactly the way I feel too. Amazes me how many "I got mine, get your own" types there are in this country.... there is no social compact or concern for their fellow man... sad.

 

[NEDude]

Good God your a libtard. Romney paid taxes on 14% of his "income" last year due to the simple fact he does not receive a regular paycheck like the rest of us. Your hangup on % vs actual dollars is ludicrous. 14% of $21.6 million is $3.04 million. The middle class family making $50,000 AGI paid %15 or $7500. If Romney is smart enough to figure that out, why can't you? Or do you want him to "share the wealth" with you too? You want to the "Romneys'" of America to pay what you see as their "fair share" no questions asked, yet you seem to think that most other Americans are the hard working, down trodden, put-upon middle class that they've been led to believe they are and that they pay way too much to the federal government already. BS. Show me a food stamp recipient in America and I'll show you the same person holding a cell phone, buying designer name clothes, and shopping at Macy's while waiting for Obama care to pay for her check ups so she doesn't have to go to the free clinic. Time to step up and quit laying your blame game on people in America who are successful.

You really believe a majority of food stamp recipients have cell phones, wear designer clothes and shop at Macy's?! You need to turn off Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and head down to the local welfare office and take good hard look at who is coming in. I guarantee you it is not the people Fox News would have you believe it is. Government welfare is a needed lifeline for many people and can even serve as a springboard for people to improve their lives to a point where they can become chairman of American motors, governor of the state of Michigan and have a son run for President...

 

[B727FA]

to pay for her check ups so she doesn't have to go to the free clinic.

Bhaaaa-haaaa! "free clinic!" Classic...no, really. Do you do stand up? :laugh: You don't even know what you're saying. :nuts: