Author Topic: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.  (Read 53917 times)

Offline moor

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1134
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #135 on: April 08, 2010, 07:31:44 am »
Well guys, believe what you wish. But it is wishful thinking.  ::)

The laws of economics cannot be repealed, by either political party.   

The Coming Entitlement Tsunami
by Michael D. Tanner
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11666
April 6, 2010


Our major entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, are all careening toward insolvency.

Social Security faces unfunded liabilities of more than $15.8 trillion. And while that sounds like a lot of money, it is dwarfed by Medicare's looming budget shortfall of between $50 and $100 trillion, depending on which accounting measure is used. Because of its funding mechanisms, Medicaid does face the same type of accounting shortfalls, but it will soon add hundreds of billions of dollars to federal, not to mention state, spending.

As the full force of entitlement programs kicks in, the federal government will consume more than 40 percent of GDP by the middle of the century. Half of that will be taken up by just those three entitlement programs. From there, it only gets worse.

Faced with this rising tide of red ink, the traditional response in Washington is that we must have the "courage" to raise taxes. But think about how much taxes would actually have to be raised to pay for all the government spending to come. And it's not just the "rich" who would get soaked. In fact, if you confiscated the wealth of every person in the United States earning over $1 million per year, you would barely make a dent in our future obligations.

If we really wanted to pay for the amount of spending to come, we would have to raise both the corporate tax rate and top income tax rate from their current 35 percent to 88 percent, the current 25 percent tax rate for middle-income workers to 63 percent, and the 10 percent tax bracket for low-income workers to 25 percent.



[For full article, see link]




Trillions over what? One year, Two, Twelve?   And how exactly would changing the tax rate "fix" it?


Offline Vic Vega

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4151
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #136 on: April 08, 2010, 07:48:58 am »
You will note that it never occurs to Mr. Tanner to reduce defense spending to make up for some of the shortfall.

Also as many here have repeatedly mentioned the top tax rate for most of recent history was far higher than 34% percent.

In Mr. Tanner's world Richard M. Nixon is an redistrbutary fanatic.

Make of that what you will.

Medicaid AND Medicare would be made much more efficient if the U.S. made VistA the national standard for health care tech. Its already used in all VA hospitals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VistA#Usage_in_non-governmental_hospitals
« Last Edit: April 08, 2010, 08:18:54 am by Vic Vega »

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #137 on: April 08, 2010, 08:02:54 am »
My understanding is that this is the projected funding shortfall as the population ages.  There are only three ways to reduce the shortfall:  reduce or eliminate the programs, borrow (by issuing more Treasury securities, leaving the debt for future generations) or raise taxes.  What the author points out is that the rates of taxation would have to be draconian to cover the projected unfunded future shortfalls in these programs.  Not to mention the destructive effect that such excessive taxation (and/or debt) would have on the economy.

On another point, the notion of "benevolent spending" -- It is not "benevolent" to forcibly extract money from a man to give to yourself.  That is not benevolence, that is selfishness, akin to theft.  What is benevolent is when you voluntarily give of your own money to others need.  Programs that forceably redistribute wealth by dint of the recipient having a pulse, wholly unrelated to the work (or difficult educational preparation) that person has engaged in, has a number of negative social consequences.  Undermines the work ethic, undermines the sense of personal responsibility to take care of yourself and your family, undermines the personal sense of responsibility one has to care for others (with one's own funds, by way of charity), undermines the family (as the government, not the family, "takes care" of you), while the taxation and/or debt serve to undermine the incentives to work as you are increasingly "allowed" to keep less and less of your money earned (or pass less and less of it to your children).  All this also serves to foster economic dependency on the State, which undermines individual liberty.

I'm not a libertarian absolutist. Some taxation and government spending is necessary for the society to function. But the bias should be in favor or respecting the rights to property of the individual, as it is the individual who earned the income.

Offline moor

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1134
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #138 on: April 08, 2010, 08:16:17 am »
Mike,

It IS MY MONEY  :D  I'm not saying tax "the rich"  I'm saying tax everybody.

I'm certainly not advocating for entitlement in the sense that you do nothing and get perks for it.  I'm saying that we need to ask ourselves what is an acceptable level of basic provision in a free society - ("free" as in "dom"  ;))  and how much, seriously is that worth to us.  What is the value of providing for the public welfare?  I'm not so sure that's as subjective as the national stage-makers would have us all believe. 

I BELIEVE that in a society where we subsidize agricultural exports, we can find the resources to properly subsidize a basic level of health care that benefits all citizens.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #139 on: April 08, 2010, 09:04:00 pm »
I understand where you are coming from.  As I say, while I'm presenting the "Libertarian" viewpoint here, I am not a Libertarian Absolutist.  That is, however, my strong orientation, for the reasons I've stated, above, based on both economics and values.

Perhaps part of it is that my folks were young adults during the Depression, and drilled into me the concept that I should be thankful for any work, that no honest work is beneath a man, and that one must study hard when young and work hard as an adult, one's entire life.  With the expection of not getting anything for free.  In other words, with no sense of unearned "entitlement." 

Offline Lion

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1275
  • Totally hatin'.
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #140 on: April 08, 2010, 11:41:32 pm »
Interesting pictures...

Who oversaw the greatest expansion of the national debt during his two terms in office?

RONALD REAGAN... followed by GHWB on one term.

And the greatest reduction over the course of his two terms in office?

Truman, Eisenhower, LBJ, but after that...

BILL CLINTON

f*cking hypocrites need to go choke on their teabags.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #141 on: April 14, 2010, 09:55:47 am »
I would have to know exactly what Ronald Reagan spent money on vs. Jimmy Carter.  Carter was one of the most inept presidents in American history (particularly as to geopolitics - read Iran - and as time has gone on he has only become a bigger lunatic and whore). 

In contrast, Reagan, as a direct result of his efforts and spending, destroyed the Soviet Communist Empire. Ending the Cold War. Something that NOBODY, certainly nobody on the Left, and even "realists" on the Right, thought would ever be possible. Creating the "Peace Dividend" that Clinton was able to take advantage of.

Offline BmoreAkuma

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2237
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #142 on: April 14, 2010, 01:27:22 pm »
I would have to know exactly what Ronald Reagan spent money on vs. Jimmy Carter.  Carter was one of the most inept presidents in American history (particularly as to geopolitics - read Iran - and as time has gone on he has only become a bigger lunatic and whore). 

In contrast, Reagan, as a direct result of his efforts and spending, destroyed the Soviet Communist Empire. Ending the Cold War. Something that NOBODY, certainly nobody on the Left, and even "realists" on the Right, thought would ever be possible. Creating the "Peace Dividend" that Clinton was able to take advantage of.
At the cost of what?
With these choices, I felt that the American black man only needed to choose which one to get eaten by; the liberal fox or the conservative wolf because both of them will eat him.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #143 on: April 14, 2010, 08:54:18 pm »
I would have to know exactly what Ronald Reagan spent money on vs. Jimmy Carter.  Carter was one of the most inept presidents in American history (particularly as to geopolitics - read Iran - and as time has gone on he has only become a bigger lunatic and whore). 

In contrast, Reagan, as a direct result of his efforts and spending, destroyed the Soviet Communist Empire. Ending the Cold War. Something that NOBODY, certainly nobody on the Left, and even "realists" on the Right, thought would ever be possible. Creating the "Peace Dividend" that Clinton was able to take advantage of.
At the cost of what?

I don't understand your question.  At the "cost" of ending the Cold War.  At the "cost" of ending (or at least significantly minimizing) Communism as a meaningful worldwide ideological force.  Which, no doubt, some so-called "Progressives" did see as a real "cost." (Boohoo to them). However, given the vicious totalitarian nature of the Communist movement, all rational people (Democrats and Republicans) saw this as a benefit.  Not that sympathizers still don't exist, including among some that President Obama sought to appoint to Executive Branch positions, and including some Latin American strong-men.   But as a global movement, it is fair to say that Communism is dead. 

Now, thanks to Ronald Reagan, the bullsh*t mask has been ripped off KGB thugs like Putin.  It was the mask that Communism always relied on, the idealistic ideology wholly disconnected from reality, the noble rhetoric divorced from oppressive practice. Of course, Bolshevism as professed by Lenin from the outset justified its totalitarian "means" of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat based on the never-to-be realized Utopian "end" of a Worker's Paradise, but this mask duped a lot of gullible well-meaning people (particularly in the 1930s and 1940s) ... with their legacy continuing into the 1960s and beyond. 

For those of you who are too young to remember, because you take the fall of the Soviet Union for granted, as a historical fact, I can assure you that many folk, on the Left, in the Middle, and on the Right, never saw the fall of the Soviet Union as a realistic possibility.  Including Henry Kissinger under Richard Nixon who preferred the notion of accepting the existence of the Soviet Union under the approach of Detente.  Many, including Republican "realists" criticized Ronald Reagan for his "naive and simplistic" vision of the world.  Many mocked him as nothing more than a "Grade B movie actor reading lines."  Even more significantly, respected commentators trembled that Reagan was making the world far less safe when Reagan characterized the Soviet Union as the "Evil Empire" and when he advocated a missile defense system (idiotically labeled "Star Wars" by his critics).

Yet it was Reagan's idealism, in the face of these wrong-headed critics, that directly lead to the collapse of the Soviet Empire and the freeing of Eastern Europe.

Today we are faced with an ideology every bit as evil, indeed arguably far worse, than Communism, in the form of Radical Islam. Because by its very terms, it does not even pretend to don the mask of secular Utopianism and Egalitarianism.  Rather it views oppression as a positive ideal.  Horrible oppression of women, oppression of religious minorities, oppression of alternative points of view, oppression of democratic sentiments, and so on.  And yet, many on the Left, the very folk one would expect would be most offended by the tenets of Radical Islam, do nothing, and say nothing. Instead, they pander and advocate appeasement. So used to hating America, they are, that they can't bring themselves to express criticism of America's enemies.  Even when those enemies are no longer the noble Communist Workers of the World. 

Fools, they are. And Hypocrites.

Offline Francisco

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #144 on: April 15, 2010, 09:32:02 am »
The Soviet Union would have crashed with or without Reagan's intervention. Basically all Reagan did was to use the Red Scare excuse to spend as much money on weapons that weren't really necessary while screwing the underprivileged.

The only thing I think you're right, Mike. Is when you say radical Islamism is a treat as big or bigger than communism ever was. .
Don't get fooled by the bombs that I get I'm still I'm still Saddam from Iraq.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #145 on: April 16, 2010, 04:21:50 pm »
The Soviet Union would have crashed with or without Reagan's intervention. Basically all Reagan did was to use the Red Scare excuse to spend as much money on weapons that weren't really necessary while screwing the underprivileged.

The only thing I think you're right, Mike. Is when you say radical Islamism is a threat as big or bigger than communism ever was. .

Well, my recollection is that Reagan outspent the Soviets, and that they could not sustain the cost of their end of the Cold War. 

... but that's history.  As to the present geopolitical threat, looks like we see eye to eye.  ;)


Offline Jay

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #146 on: April 17, 2010, 08:50:35 am »
The Soviet Union would have crashed with or without Reagan's intervention. Basically all Reagan did was to use the Red Scare excuse to spend as much money on weapons that weren't really necessary while screwing the underprivileged.

The only thing I think you're right, Mike. Is when you say radical Islamism is a threat as big or bigger than communism ever was. .

Well, my recollection is that Reagan outspent the Soviets, and that they could not sustain the cost of their end of the Cold War. 

... but that's history.  As to the present geopolitical threat, looks like we see eye to eye.  ;)



Regan! lol

Didn't that dude create something called Reganeconomics? Which is basically telling businessmen it's okay to be greedy!
"You're gonna go out, and look, for, a job. The word today is...'job'. Jay Oh Bee...y'hear me?"

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #147 on: April 18, 2010, 02:07:12 am »
Jay, there is absolutely nothing wrong with businesses striving to make a profit. This is not evil. This is how people support themselves in business, and aspire to grow and innovate to attract more customers for their goods and services.

Often those on the Left parrot the old Communist Party Line, of Capitalist "Greed" etc etc etc ...  Don't fall for it.

Where things do fall off track is where executives engage in outright fraud (etc), as we discussed on the "Black Tea Partier" thread.  Mechanisms do exist, and are appropriately exercised, to deal with this.

As to Reaganomics, the concept (which was correct) is that by reducing taxes, you stimulate business expansion, and thus (paradoxically) increase the tax base as more expanded businesses earn more income subject to income taxation. As the tax base increases, taxes raised increase, even though the tax rate is reduced.  Because the amount of taxes collected is a function of two elements:  Tax Rate x Tax Base.  The Tax Base is not static, but rather increases as business is encouraged.

The jobs created by this approach are, by the way, productive jobs, not inefficient Government make-work "jobs."

Offline Jay

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #148 on: April 18, 2010, 08:16:18 am »
Jay, there is absolutely nothing wrong with businesses striving to make a profit. This is not evil. This is how people support themselves in business, and aspire to grow and innovate to attract more customers for their goods and services.

Often those on the Left parrot the old Communist Party Line, of Capitalist "Greed" etc etc etc ...  Don't fall for it.

Where things do fall off track is where executives engage in outright fraud (etc), as we discussed on the "Black Tea Partier" thread.  Mechanisms do exist, and are appropriately exercised, to deal with this.

As to Reaganomics, the concept (which was correct) is that by reducing taxes, you stimulate business expansion, and thus (paradoxically) increase the tax base as more expanded businesses earn more income subject to income taxation. As the tax base increases, taxes raised increase, even though the tax rate is reduced.  Because the amount of taxes collected is a function of two elements:  Tax Rate x Tax Base.  The Tax Base is not static, but rather increases as business is encouraged.

The jobs created by this approach are, by the way, productive jobs, not inefficient Government make-work "jobs."

What?! When did I say making a profit was evil ???

Here's the thing. I kindof agree that reducing taxes will promote jobs but that requires me to believe that big business will hire AMERICAN workers or do the right thing! Which is why I find it hard to subscribe to the trickle-down theory. (or as I like to call it, the Golden-shower theory  :D)

I could have sworn when I called a recent help line that "Joe" (if that was his real name) had a Indian accent. lol
(but maynot be what you consider a PRODUCTIVE JOB)

I don't think capitalism is greedy in itself. I think there's too much example of corporate greed going on. Enron got punished but how many more companies get away with doing what Enron did?

And yes or no. The gap between the rich and the poor is growing?

Now on the flip side, I did get a chance to talk to a respectable businessman who said the causes of his taxes going up was the reason he couldn't hire more american workers.

However, again I think people like him in these big business corporations are few and far between. Most I think would just pocket that money instead of creating new jobs here in America and would just OUTSOURCE to mexico or some other country where they can pay a worker a few cents then an American worker who would need more money plus benefits.
"You're gonna go out, and look, for, a job. The word today is...'job'. Jay Oh Bee...y'hear me?"

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Tax Protestor Crashes Plane Into Office Building.
« Reply #149 on: April 18, 2010, 10:03:56 am »
Outsourcing is a problem, I agree. But the solution is not to cripple American business and undermine economic incentives for success. If, over the long term, the only "solution" is greater and greater expansion of government and greater and greater retraction of private enterprise, then our country really is doomed.