Taxifornia!

[gunfyter]

You guys act as though there would be no health Care or Retirement unless it is provided by the government. But ... the government SS and Medicare system is as bankrupt as Bernie Madoff's product was.

Let private insurance and investment companies compete and create products to replace it.

In the meantime I am sure Aunt Caroline can move in with you after SS fails.

 

[glasspilot]

Yeah, little kids should rely on their parents to earn enough to get medical treatment. Families should lose their homes and lives when illness strikes.

Did you know a senior NetJet Captain does NOT have health insurance? That's right. NONE of us do. If that NetJet Captain (or any of us) gets sick...really sick, like diabetes or cancer or heart disease...then he (us) will lose our precious 1st class medical. When that goes so does our job. When the job goes guess what else stops?

That's right...OUR health insurance! I'll say it again; Health Care should NOT be a "for profit" enterprise. Maybe the government sucks. Okay. Do you think the military is horrible or do they do a pretty good job? How about cops and fire departments? Do they suck too? I'm saying the health care of OUR nation is too important...just like defense, fire fighting, crime prevention...to be left to some traded commodity for the benefit of investors, treating the patients (us) as liabilities to those profits.

Same thing can be said for social security.

 

[gunfyter]

You guys need an economic education:

Try this: The Law

 

[wacoflyr]

You guys act as though there would be no health Care or Retirement unless it is provided by the government. But ... the government SS and Medicare system is as bankrupt as Bernie Madoff's product was.

Let private insurance and investment companies compete and create products to replace it.

In the meantime I am sure Aunt Caroline can move in with you after SS fails.

So you have no answer. Aunt Caroline has no independence, and suffers. Suppose her family ignores her. And we fail as a civilization, because we fail to take care of our own. Republicans always claim to be the 'mature' party, but I do not see how ignoring one's own who can no longer earn a decent living is 'responsible.'

And the poor? They are your own. "and they will always be with you."

The far left is just as bad, of course. I just hope that the middle can hold. They have been put to the test, lately. One is in the white house.

 

[wacoflyr]

Your web link is broken. What, was it the ten commandments, or something?

 

[glasspilot]

You guys need an economic education:

Try this: The Law

No, you are the one in need of an education. Both in economics and how not to post a busted link. Your bastiat.org link does not work, much like your economic models.

 

[glasspilot]

Your web link is broken. What, was it the ten commandments, or something?

Again? Really? What's that? 4 or 5 times tonite you've beat me to the response by a few minutes?

Okay, he's all yours. I'm going to bed. Go Fox.

 

[rettofly]

Here's the problem. When 2% make 90% of the wealth then yes, it is reasonable to expect them to pay 90% of the taxes. When they pay 39% tax instead of 34% on their $400,000 plus earnings (minus deductions) then I'm not too concerned. Call me when it tops 60%, maybe I'll care more.

Oh, and my health care is NOT a for profit enterprise. Neither should be political campaigns.

Let's make sure we're talking apples to apples. I'm saying that 90% of the income tax revenue comes from the top tier earners, regardless of statutory or effective tax rates. Over 40% of households pay no tax at all, and many of these actually get a "refund" (Earned Income Tax Credit). This is about as progressive a tax scheme as you can imagine.

If the statutory rate is raised, the top tier will simply find ways to maintain the effective rate. This will require moving more accumulated wealth to investment vehicles that do not contribute to capital formation and economic growth. When all is said and done, you will be left with less income tax revenue, less economic growth and the satisfaction of knowing you put it to the evil rich.

The only effective way to "spread the wealth" is to promote an environment that encourages the private sector to create jobs. The government can not create jobs, Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush 44 understood this. Look up the economic statistics.
FDR and BHO didn't / don't understand this. Look up the economic statistics.

For those afflicted with wealth envy and well-intentioned notions of Social Justice, it may seem unfair to see a great disparity of incomes between the top earners and the low end of the earnings spectrum, but that is certainly preferable to the disparity of less income at the top and no income at the bottom. Equality of economic or any other desired outcome can't be legislated any more than morality can be legislated.

 

[rettofly]

And Hey, I'm not down on the rich. I'd love to be rich and pay 39%. Also, so are Clinton, Gates, Jobbs, Buffett, and many many more. When you do well in this country you owe a debt to the country that enabled it.

If you want to cut money then perhaps we don't need a Department of Defence that has a bigger budget then the next FIVE largest militaries COMBINED. Maybe we could get by spending more than the next 3 or 4. Would that be okay?

Ya know what? Never mind. Just go watch more Fox.

Guess what? Clinton, Gates, Jobs, Buffett and many many more don't pay 39%. It's not the country that enables these guys to get rich. It's their entreprneurial skills, whatever form they may take that enable them to get rich.

Do you think Gates, Jobs and Dell were working with government grants on government projects when they were sitting in their garages writing code and putting prototype PCs together? What government help did Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Wilbur and Orville Wright and many others receive? Do you think Clinton was using government funding when he put his lucrative lecture business together? Do you think Buffett was getting government assistance when he was developing his investment strategy? Are the highly paid sports, entertainment and media stars getting government assistance to help them get wealthier? Other than graciously allowing you to defer taxes on your 401(k) plan, is the government providing assistance to help you get rich?

 

[rettofly]

Government is 25% of the US GDP. But the Chinese government portion of their GDP is less than 10%

We can cut spending to limit the government share of GDP to match the Chinese at 10%. Surely we can adjust our spending to not exceed a communist governments respective percentage of GDP....

The COTUS authorizes 4 federal departments .... Treasury, State, War and Navy.... Presently we spend 40% of the federal budget on these. 40% of the 25% GDP is 10% GDP.

We can reduce government to 10% GDP by simply following the Constitution!

We can then balance the budget by eliminating the Income tax and imposing a 10% consumption tax or a Jerry Brown style 10% Flat Tax. Lets make it 15% and pay off the debt....

I actually prefer the Fair Tax and repeal of the 16th Amendment.