Middle Class Tax Cuts Extended - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-24-2004, 06:41 AM   #16
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 02:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Salome

a government with huge deficits doesn't have the money to take care of people who really need it
that's not a communist approach on economics but a human approach on life
Exactly! I was just listening to "Homegrown Democrat" by Garrison Kellior, and he makes this exact point. The public mindedness, the take-care-of-your-neighbor-because-thats-just-what-you-should -do is dwindling, and Norquist and Co's insane mission to destroy government via demonizing taxes (his words, not mine) even though he KNOWS and has said on public record it's bad economics is a major reason why it's gone. (See the Krugman article I posted for details if you want. )

It's worth noting how Scriptual this is too--love thy neighbor. Due unto others. Care for the widow and orphan. The needy. It's one of the most consistent themes throughout the entire Bible. I will never understand how the religious right justifies their stance in this light.

Okay, back to class work.

sd
__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 07:56 AM   #17
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by sharky
NB, if you think this tax cut is so great can you please explain to us how Bush plans to PAY for this break?
In a nutshell, tax breaks are paid by an improved economy generating higher revenues. It is not paid, nor is ever intended to be paid, within the same fiscal year budget.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 07:59 AM   #18
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 07:13 AM
if you would have stated
"tax cuts are supposed to be paid by an improved economy "
I would agree

then the problem would still be that not everyone benefits from an improved economy
unless you are able to establish an economic eutopia
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 08:00 AM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling
It's worth noting how Scriptual this is too--love thy neighbor. Due unto others. Care for the widow and orphan. The needy. It's one of the most consistent themes throughout the entire Bible. I will never understand how the religious right justifies their stance in this light.
I'm not sure if this is just a swipe at conservative Christians, but there is significant work done by Christian (and other religious) organizations to fullfill these Biblical commands. The command is personal and is exercised by multitudes each day.

Jesus never said "vote for big government so someone else can take care of the widow and orphan."
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 08:34 AM   #20
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 07:13 AM
nbcrusader
well it's easier for me to imagine Jesus suporting a government who takes care of widows and orphans than a government who wages wars in the name of liberation and comerce
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 02:02 PM   #21
Acrobat
 
Ft. Worth Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 390
Local Time: 01:13 AM
Needless to say, Jesus said little about government, and believe me, he could have said a lot about the Roman Empire. His ultimate goal was to change the hearts of people so they could become his followers and disciples. "Render unto Caesar" is an oft quoted verse. Also, Paul always spoke of serving the government (unless they commanded one to do something contrary to God such as sacrificing to other gods or bowing to Caesar).

Regarding taxes, low-income people do pay very little. I grew up in a very low income household (but no welfare) and my family always got money instead of paying. Of course this is just one family, but I would imagine that there are many others like this.
__________________
Ft. Worth Frog is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 04:28 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Jamila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,454
Local Time: 12:13 AM
Ft Worth Frog, I must disagree!

I don't know how old you are, but the tax codes have been radically altered over the years, so your family's experience years ago ARE PROBABLY NOT THE EXPERIENCE OF THOSE OF US LOW-INCOME WORKING PEOPLE TODAY!

Also, do you know how much your family got? What was the percentage that they got back compared to people in higher tax brackets? The AWFUL TRUTH is that in today's America, the working poor are paying a HIGHER % of their income compared to higher income tax payers - where is the justice in that?

THERE SIMPLY ISN'T ANY.

The Census Bureau's statistics last month showed that more and more people are working for less in the USA and are becoming poorer because of it. At the same time, because they are making less money, they don't make enough money to take advantage of these tax cuts for childcare!

Can someone explain the fairness of that?
__________________
Jamila is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 05:52 PM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 01:13 AM
i hate when people say tax cuts only really help the wealthy. they help everybody, but because the wealthy are paying the most taxes by far, obviously they will get the most back. this article explains it very nicely.

Quote:
Sometimes Liberal Politicians can exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!", and, by some, its accepted to be fact. But what does that really mean? Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, we hope the following will help.

Tax Cuts - A Simple Lesson In Economics

This is how the cookie crumbles. Please read it carefully.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh $7.
The eighth $12.
The ninth $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."

So, now dinner for the ten only cost $80. The group still wanted to
pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So, the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six, the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share'?

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being 'PAID' to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He
pointed to the tenth man "but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar,
too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men
surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how
our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.

There are lots of good restaurants in Mexico and the Caribbean.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D Distinguished Professor of Economics 536
Brooks Hall, University of Georgia
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 09-24-2004, 06:43 PM   #24
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,400
Local Time: 01:13 AM


i just don't get the whole "tax cut for the rich" thing. obviously, if a person pays more, they'll get more money back, even with a lower rebate percentage than people who paid fewer taxes.

why is it fair to penalize the rich just because they're rich? if a guy pays 100 in taxes, and another guy pays 10 in taxes, and they're given a tax rebate, exactly how would it be fair to give the guy who paid 10 and equal amount to the guy who paid 100? you're punishing the guy who paid more taxes to begin with. i don't get it. maybe i'm just stupid or something.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 09-25-2004, 12:58 AM   #25
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 05:13 PM
I dont believe in penalising the rich 'just because they are rich' either.

I want to ask this as straight forward as possible to those who think the rich shouldn't pay more:
Do you think, yes or no, that all individuals in society should do what their means allow, to bring everyone up? To pay more if it is needed to get things like health and education as available as possible? Consider that wealth itself means little in terms of 'rights' as we then need to seperate the means of wealth. Some are born with it, some win it, some work very bloody hard for it, some are skilled such as athletes etc, some are lucky and find a rare way of making it easily. Is all their wealth the same, in terms of 'why should they be penalised'?


__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:05 AM   #26
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 02:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


I'm not sure if this is just a swipe at conservative Christians, but there is significant work done by Christian (and other religious) organizations to fullfill these Biblical commands. The command is personal and is exercised by multitudes each day.

Jesus never said "vote for big government so someone else can take care of the widow and orphan."
NBC, disagreeing is not a swipe. LOL. As far as I know, Christ never really spoke to the issue of "big" versus "small" government.

I've taken a lot of classes and and researched and written about this issue, however, and I've seen a lot of research that demonstrates that a thriving public sector reduces poverty. Great (not just "will do") schools pull kids off the streets. Fully staffed and equipped and *nationally covered* hospitals provide medical care to the low income and impoverished. Check out the UN Human Development Index, for example. Countries with strong welfare states have lower rates of poverty, and (this really struck me) lower rates of violent crime.

I think the "charity" arguement is flawed, as much as those who give to charity, as I do myself, have their hearts in the right place. It ignores the big picture of the *systems* that create the need for charity in the first place.

Angie, great questions! Appreciate your post!

Peace,
Cheryl
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:08 AM   #27
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 02:13 AM
Forgot the add a link to a great Krugman article, the "Tax Cut Con". A very revealing interview with Grover Norquist, the leading "taxes are evil and so is government" guy.

http://www.faireconomy.org/econ/taxe...TaxCutCon.html

sd
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:21 AM   #28
Refugee
 
BostonAnne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2,052
Local Time: 02:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling
I think the "charity" arguement is flawed, as much as those who give to charity, as I do myself, have their hearts in the right place. It ignores the big picture of the *systems* that create the need for charity in the first place.
Thank you, you explained that very well.
__________________
BostonAnne is offline  
Old 09-25-2004, 07:26 AM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Should people become dependant and to the state for survival, in the long term is a welfare state a desirable option, does it not create the very systems that seem to perpetuate poverty when they inevitably break down.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 09-26-2004, 06:31 AM   #30
Refugee
 
BostonAnne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2,052
Local Time: 02:13 AM
There has to be a balance of perpetuating poverty and preventing it. People shouldn't be dependant on government assistance, nor should the be denied it.

One example: Currently, too many jobs are created to get around paying health insurance. Too many people can't afford that option or don't even have it. Our government should put in effect some laws and/or assistance to make health insurance for people affordable and mandatory. The corporations aren't going to turn around and become generous. They only care about the shareholders - not the employees. It's up to the government to fix that.
__________________

__________________
BostonAnne is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com