Why we can't afford tax cuts (page 8)

Realist

thichi,

well congratulations...you are in the top income class...therefore i am not surprised you like the system. however you should open your eyes to whats going on in the wolrd and in your country.

the median houshold (!) income in the US is 42.000$ / annum! average income of the lower 90% of the population is 33.000$ /annum.

when taking inflation into account that median income has decreased since the late 70ties....while the top 20% of the population are making the gains.

about the life expectancy:

life expectancy exploded in the western world originally because of the extreme decrease in child deaths rates. and since WWII because of a) no wars b) better medical techniques.

in the 3rd world it is very similar...africa gets basic medication (antibiotics etc.) and food supplies from the west which greatly reduces child death rates and deaths caused by epidemics. this does NOT mean the average african is being more wealthy than 100 years ago.

patio34

This is well-worth the time to see--it's hilarious!!! (And on-point to this dicussion ) Be sure to give it time to load.

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/taxcut.html

Pat

patio34

Yerusalyim

Realist,

You're floating around some numbers that don't agree, can you explain them to me. On the one hand you say the median income is 42,000 a year, that means as 50% make more than that and 50% less than that. On the other hand you said that 90% make 33,000 a year. Both those numbers can't be correct.

The Democrats would have one beleive that any household that makes 92,000 a year is rich, these are they guys paying most of the taxes. I've seen how my friends that make that price range live, they don't consider themselves Rich, nor do I. In some areas of the nation, that's chump change. I still believe in a Flat Tax that eliminates most deductions. It's the fairest way to handle taxes.

The Democrats keep talking about how the working poor didn't get the tax break from this last tax cut, THAT'S RIGHT. If you don't PAY taxes, you can't get a TAX BREAK. What the dems propose is a redistribution of wealth which is socialism and just DOESN'T WORK. I have family members (by marriage) that are 3rd generation welfare reciepients NOT because they can't work, but because they find it easier to live off the public dole. I saw a dad instructing his daughter how to get benefits...NOT HOW TO GO FIND A JOB, but how to get benefits, and that was during the employeement "Hayday" of Clinton and his over inflated economy.

FLAT TAX

wasasister

Yeru writes:

What the dems propose is a redistribution of wealth which is socialism and just DOESN'T WORK.

I must point out that this government - in fact all governments - engage in redistribution of weath. Monies are gathered and spent on various programs including more than just welfare. To imply that it is only left-wing democrats who believe in this is just silly.

Yerusalyim

Patio,

Funny, yes! Accurate NO! Is the Federal Government suppossed to fund all those STATE FUNDED programs displayed in your little video? Also, I'm not daddy Megabucks, but I got it figured I'm gonna have about $1200 more in my pockets this year because of the tax cuts, money I'm pumping back into the economy right away. Tell me this, how does one give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes? That $1200 I'm keeping...why should that instead go to someone who paid no income tax at all as oppossed to myself who ended up paying about 2200 this year?

Another hilarious cartoon would have been to have a little fairy flying over each of those situations depicted sprinkling money like pixie dust. The before and after pictures would have shown no change at all, except for the "Wealthy" like myself who are lighter a few (a lot of) dollars.

One more aside, inspite of these so called tax cuts, the US Government is spending MORE now than it EVER did under Clinton. The funding for most programs wasn't cut, it's INCREASE in spending has been cut. We need to get rid of the fat... I propose getting rid of un-needed and costly military bases that are protected by local congressmen and senators as a place for the military to cut it's spending growth.

Wasa,

The Business of government is NOT the redistribution of wealth. The government collects taxes to pay for those things governments are about, common defense, etc. To take my hard earned money, and then give a handout (can't be a tax cut when you don't PAY taxes) is called an UNFAIR redistribution of wealth. The question is to you and all others...who are oppossed to me keeping my money...HOW does someone who doesn't pay income tax get a tax break?

Realist

yeru,

i believe one is the median houshold income (husband and or wife) the other the mediam income per capita.

i don'T have the census statistics here but i will look it up asap.

Yerusalyim

Wasa,

The Redistribution of Wealth general is taken to mean taking money from those that have money, and giving it to those without. So again, I gotta ask, how does someone that doesn't pay income tax get a tax break?

ThiChi

Realist:

Compared to the rest of the world, the average income is the reason the US is the most sought after place to succeed.

I have not always made this amount. I worked very hard to get where I am at. This is the beauty of this country, the chance it there for all to make it..........(FYI, I have always been anti Taxation when it come to the Income Tax, even when I made a lot less. The IT is contrary to the Constitution and its values)

ThiChi

I agree:

"Should the free market be the primary source for satisfying wants and needs, where individuals use their talent, ambition and ingenuity to acquire these things, and thereby depend on themselves and their network of friends, associates and family - or is government best or better at providing these things? Is government going to do the best job of giving you what you want? For example, do you want a home on a beach? Do you think government is the best way to go to get your home on the beach?

Do you want health care for yourself and your family? Do you want to have no financial worries? Is the government the best source for you to invest in to get to that point? That's the argument. There are many people who want to steer you to government for all the answers to all the wants and needs that you have, and there are those like me who think that you are in far more control, far more command, and have far more ability to be interested in yourself than any bureaucrat or any agency or any government at large.

If it helps you in your decision, think about this: If you want the government involved in almost every aspect of your decision-making and your life - if you want the government to be involved in the outcomes of life - then become a Democrat and become a liberal. But if you want to rely on yourself and this network of friends, associates, family and all that to provide for your wants and needs, then become a conservative. My guess is you ought to know which one you are based on that definition. Most people usually do when presented with the two options that way.

I mean, that's what this is all about. When you boil it all down, what we're arguing about, is that we as human beings all want certain things and we all need certain things. Our desires differ; our needs are pretty much the same. Sometimes the lines get blurred as to what a "need" versus a "desire" is, but it really boils down to where's the best place to go to solve or to acquire your wants and needs. I've always, my whole life, thought, "Not only is it my responsibility to provide my needs and wants, I would be far better if I did because I'm going to end up getting a lot more of what I need and a lot more of what I want."

I don't want to be waiting or depending on somebody that I don't even know to give me something every day. The odds that I'm going to get all I need and all I want on the basis of somebody's being nice to me is too much of a long shot. I don't even want to mess with it. But we have a percentage of our population which has been conditioned to think that way. I could point out the areas of town where they live - and it's a damn shame, because they have been lied to. They have been falsely promised. They have had their hopes raised year after year after year, yet they live in comparative squalor and end up despising and resenting those that don't.

They've been depending on all these people who tell them, "Just stick with us and you'll have your needs, and you'll have your wants. We'll take care of you. We have more compassion for you than other people do." I don't care what town you live in or what part of the country you visit, you can find the people who have decided that they're not going to count on themselves, because they've been convinced for a whole host of reasons that it's better to count on some politician or some government agency or government at large to help them. You can see, my friends, in a very quick glance - town to town, neighborhood to neighborhood - what the best way to solve the dilemma over satisfying your wants and needs is. It doesn't take much effort at all, and when you make that effort, I know which side you'll come down on. "

Why we can't afford tax cuts

Share this