If taxes are not TO BE punitive, they must be raised on everyone, equally;
otherwise, by definition, they are punitive.Eric may think that
taking another 2% or 5% of someone else's money would do no harm. If that
is the case, then he should be first in line to ask the President to raise his
taxes by that percent.All the businesses that I work with are on the
verge of closing. Technically, all of the owners are part of that "rich
guy" group targeted by Obama's tax increase. All of them need to make
substantial capital improvements to their companies. Capital improvements come
out of owner's equity - profits. They can't get loans and Obama is
telling them that he has more right to their money than they do. They will
close their businesses before they allow Obama to "target" them. ALL citizens must pay taxes - equally, I.e., the same tax rate.
Anything else is discriminatory.
Cut the military? The proper role of government is to protect life, liberty and
property. The President takes an oath of office to protect tis country from all
enemies foreign or domestic. We need the military to protect us from our
enemies and help other countries so they don't attack us. Of course
military can't be everywere but should be were our national interests and
prosperity lie.Taxes should be used for protection of life liberty
and property, City and state taxes have far more basis like Education and fire
and police. Not to take something someone else earned and give it to another.
Since government can't create wealth that would dry up things real quick.
Eric, nice letter, but you are missing the point of Grover's tax cutting
efforts. He isn't trying to balance the budget, he is trying to make the
federal government powerless and ineffective."My goal is to cut
government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can
drown it in the bathtub". Grover Norquist For
conservatives tax cutting is not about economics, it's about "starving
"All the businesses that I work with are on the verge of closing."That's funny Mike, because the business that I work for is
expanding. In fact, after being local for most of it's history, we've
been expanding during this "Great Recession." Perhaps the
businesses you work with are being mismanaged? Perhaps you folks are out of
touch with not providing a product or service that is in high demand? While you're too busy complaining about the economy and taxes and blaming
everything on Obama, many companies, like mine, are flourishing.Take
a look at yourself and your failing businesses. Be accountable. Before you blame
other persons or things on your failures. Be accountable. Many of us are seeing
great success right now. Provide a good/service in high demand and
it won't matter what the tax rate is or who is President.
Eric,If the increase is so small and will have no appreciable negative
effect on the economy, why shouldn’t all pay it? Why not roll back ALL
the cuts, including the payroll tax cut that has taken 1/6 of SS’s
funding?What do you consider small? 4.6 is over 13% of 35, so you
are really talking about an increase of over 13%; a 13% increase is small? And
at 39.6%, the top tax rate would be nearly twice what King Noah levied on his
people (before considerin local taxes). But I guess since it is other
people’s money you are talking about, you have no problem taking it.As for increasing the wages on which SS taxes can be levied – all
that does is kick the can down the road, since the level of SS benefits is based
on the amount paid in – increasing the wages subject to the tax increases
the benefits later paid to those who paid in.Taxes are evil when
they create and maintain a culture of dependency, where he who is idle eats the
bread and wears the garment of the laborer.
Well Eric, the plan congress and the president put in place, which we call the
fiscal cliff, will pretty much do just that. So let's just go with it and
see how it turns out. Republicans have no need to cave on their values.Just remember, they set this plan up to be so awful that it would force them
to negotiate a long term coherent plan to replace it, so they wouldn't
crash the economy. It would be better to go with a short term trial to find out
it fails, than put a long term disaster just like it into law.
Maverick, your reply to Mike is simply outstanding. Thank you.
Christian, just change one word in your comment and you'd be right.Change Republicans to Democrats and you'll have it correct.
Mike Richards,If the tax rates under consideration are no higher
than what we had under Reagan or Clinton, then that they would be rates proven
not to be problematic, right? Rates that have supported economic good times and
have had republican support, true?As to the flat tax, I don’t
think you would find any political appetite for someone making $10/hour paying
the same taxes as the person making $100/hour. NTW though, whenever I have
talked taxes with high earners, they are paying less than the middle class (as a
percentage).Higv,The military is certainly a
constitutional role. But what should be the percentage of our GDP going to the
military? Ours outstrips ANY other country by huge margins. I’m not
calling for disarmament, but we may need to take a hard look at whether we need
all we pay for.
"Cut the military? The proper role of government is to protect life, liberty
and property."Absolutely cut the military! How much do we need
to outspend China before you folks consider us safe? 10x? 20x? 100x?Do you realize that we spend over 5x as much on defense spending as #2 China?
10x as much than #3 Russia? I'm pretty sure if anybody wanted to start
something, we could handle them, easily.The other issue is with
nation building. As long as we keep giving our children away and blank checks to
the government, they'll keep putting us into voluntary wars. Much like your
"starve the beast" mentality when it comes to taxes, lets "starve
the beast" in military. Only then, will we use our armed forced for real
threats, NOT NATION BUILDING.Lastly, why is it that repubs suspect
all social programs in the government to be full of corruption and incompetence
but give the military a free pass? If food stamps and SS are being abused, why
not the military? Do you realize that they spent $5 billion on new pixilated
uniforms which don't work? Now they're going back to the originals.
Talk about wasteful spending!
There is still something wrong with the story Mr. Richards is telling. The
owners he is talking about own businesses that need capital
improvements..can't get loans..& make profits over $250,000 a year. I
dare any of you to call your local loan officer and check this out..it's
nonsense. These guys are spewing pure right wing ideology..and I'll bet
all of them are in business in four years. The alternative is that they have a
very bad bank. Also, if you make over $250,000 and have to close your business
because you're going to pay an additional 3% in taxes on the monies you
make over $250,000 you're not a very good manager or...and extremely greedy
Taxes are indeed punitive for at least three reasons;#1: Taxes takes money
out of the private sector that could have been used to build business, hire
people, create wealth and expand economies. California, one of the highest taxed
states in the country is an excellent example.#2: Our progressive tax
system punishes success and forces business over seas (China). The legacy of
high taxes in America= "Made in China".#3: Much of our taxes are
wasted and squandered by the government. Solyndra, GSA scandals, fast and
furious are some recent examples. Unlike the private sector, the government has
no competitor to force them to be efficient.
Take another $10 million from Bill Gates and he probably won't even notice
it. Give $10 each to a million homeless drunks on the streets who will
immediately go buy a bottle and drink themselves into a blind stupor.That may make a bunch of people happy for a day. It might stimulate the
business of the local bar or liquor store, but if you think such action will be
a net benefit to society, you are just plain wrong.The best place
for that $10 million is in the hands of the guy who earned it - Mr. Gates. He
will probably use it to employ a 100 people to build something useful for the
rest of us.My example may be extreme, but that is what happens to
far too much of our tax money. Take it away from those who would use it
productively and give it to those who would waste it away because they never
earned it. Do that 16 trillion times and the nation goes the way of Greece.
There's an excellent book everyone who cares should read. Doesn't
matter if you think of yourself as right, left, Dem or Repub."Who Stole the American Dream?" by Hedrick Smith is a carefully
researched and objective look at how we got where we are now. It lays
responsibility on those who deserve to bear it. Democrats, Republicans, Banks,
Wall Street, corporations. He lays the facts out for readers to digest and then
decide for themselves.Please read it if you care at all about trying
to make America a better place for everyone.All of us who comment
here have a responsibility to at least make an effort to learn facts rather than
simply spouting empty opinions.
I think that it is the level of taxation and the individuals and entities that
are taxed that are the problem.Consider that over sixteen percent of
our workforce works for government and is wholly paid for by the
taxpayers.Although this is less than the proportion supported in socialist
Sweden and the other Scandinavian nations, but it is more than in France,
Germany, Spain, Italy, Portugal, often referred to as "socialist"
European nations) and less than Israel incidentally. Our Corporate
tax is the highest in the world which drives corporations into foreign nations
whose taxes are not so punitive and regressive. It robs us of jobs and increases
dependence. We have substantial taxes levied on income, business, purchases,
property which collectively are a drag on the eonomy and a burden on most of the
people.There is room for cuts in what is called "defense"
but is often not defensive at all, and there is also much room for cuts in
expensive and negative bureaucracies which could be obtained fairly quickly
through attrition, early retirement options etc.
"Take another $10 million from Bill Gates and he probably won't even
notice it. Give $10 each to a million homeless drunks on the streets who will
immediately go buy a bottle and drink themselves into a blind stupor."And then you folks wonder why your party is looked at as the party for
the rich? The party who demeans so many Americans?Is it any question
why you folks are losing ground politically with each passing day? Shessh! What hateful hogwash!
Excellent letter, Eric. What most of the commenters here don't understand
is that Obama's proposal will affect only those with TAXABLE income over
$250,000 (really $223,050 for married filing jointly). That means after all
credits, deductions, and exemptions. If you work up a simple form 1040, with
minimal credits and deductions, you find that a small business owner would have
to clear at least $400,000 in profit before the Obama tax increases have any
effect at all. Obama's proposal raises rates only in the two
top tax bracket, one from 33 to 36 percent, the other from 35 to 39.6 percent.
The first increase would apply only to TAXABLE income between $223,050 and
$398,350. The second would apply only to TAXABLE income over $398,350. To reach
the threshold for the top bracket, a small business owner would have to clear
profit of well over a half million dollars. That's after all business
expenses. The effective tax increase on someone earning $400,000 would be a
little over 1 percent.And this is what all the fighting is over? No,
liberal larry is right.
The U.S. accounts for 47 percent of all military spending on the planet. We have
700 to 800 military bases in foreign countries. We employ about 80,000 military
personnel in Germany, another 50,000 in South Korea and Japan. The Pentagon is
one of the largest landowners on earth. According to Republicans, we need to
increase our military presence. Really now. World War II ended
almost 70 years ago. The Cold War ended over 20 years ago. We need this much
military might to fight Al Qaeda? To keep a presence in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or
are we planning on invading Iran and North Korea?
One old man,You've been talking about the Hedrick Smith book for some
time now. It sounds interesting; I put it on my Christmas list. If my kids
don't get it for me, I'll get it myself.
I call "BS" (Bogus Story) on Mountanman's claims why taxes are
punitive.#1: Those tax dollars that Mountanman claims are siphoned
out of the economy and vanish down some mysterious black hole really go to
hiring government employees and funding grants and government contracts. Those
government employees use their salaries to pay for housing, transportation,
food, clothing, healthcare, entertainment, etc., funneling that money back into
the economy. Grant recipients and government contractors purchase supplies,
services, and durable goods, and pay employees (who spend their salaries more or
less like the government employees do), again funneling that money back into the
economy.#2: Corporate taxes are not the main reason that businesses
relocate overseas. The #1 reason that businesses relocate to other countries is
labor costs. The very existence of WalMart is based on the fact that for some
merchandise, it is cheaper to manufacture in some sweatshop in Macau or Sri
Lanka and import than it is to manufacture domestically. The flip-side is that
the sweatshop laborers earn less than 1/10th of what they would here, work 60-70
hours/week, and have a standard of living comparable to our homeless.(continued…)
(…part 2)#3: If you honestly believe that waste, corruption,
and unethical practices don't exist in the private sector, then I have a
landmark bridge in NYC to sell you. Oligopolies and businesses with
"status" brands and high brand loyalty seem to be the most susceptible
to this. OTOH, some of the hardest-working and most efficient employees I know
happen to work in the public sector.
@ one old man. A better read is the excellent book, "No They Can't"
by John Stossel. It may even open your eyes!
Mountainman, I have read Stossel's book. That one and a wide variety of
others. By reading not only material provided by only one side of the question,
I try to read widely and obtain enough information -- pro and con, left and
right -- to be able to make informed decisions.I hope that is
reflected in my refusal to simply regurgitate canned talking points.
old man,"refusal to simply regurtiate canned talking points"THAT's why you said, "Christian, just change one word in your
comment and you'd be right. Change Republicans to Democrats and you'll
have it correct."No canned talking points there.Of
course we know why dems cannot cave on their values - they have none.
SG in SLCSalt Lake City, UTI call "BS" (Bogus Story) on
Mountanman's claims why taxes are punitive.=============== I second that.BTW - did anyone else take note of the DN
monitor/editor's bias?That ridiculous comment was selected
"Top Comment" with a Gold Star by the Deseret Newsroom, and only has 3
"Likes" by it's mostly conservative readers.And then
yet, I wonder why so many of MY comments falling well within DN monitored
guidelines, get "denied".
@ SG. Let me try to explain some economic realities. #1:If I work for the
government and pay taxes of lets say, 25%, then 75% of my salary has to be paid
for by OTHER taxpayers. Obviously the private sector does actually drive the
economy.#2:The government produces no wealth, whatever it spends has to be
taken from someone else. It produces no product, no wealth, creates nothing and
only consumes wealth. Can you name one product the government created? If you
claim NASA, think about Boeing, Lockheed Martin and dozens of other private
sector contractors that actually produce the results. #3:If a private
company isn't efficient, its competitors will take it out. Free competition
is the oil that lubricates capitalism.#4:Every time the government takes
money from the private sector, it makes them less able to compete, especially
with China who can produce goods for much less than we can in America, partially
due our government's restrictions, taxes and regulations. Been to Wal-Mart
lately and looked to see where the vast majority of products are produced?I rest my case!
Some say we are a "Chrisitan" nation, What did God himself say
about this matter?Setting, this takes place a few decades after the
Great tax revolt against the Romans, Jerusalem - about 6 A.D.Many
conservative Jews then felt the same way many Conservative Christians feel today
- His answer:Luke 20:22 Is it lawful for us to give
tribute unto Caesar, or no?23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said
unto them, Why tempt ye me?24 Show me a penny. Whose image and
superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.25 And he
said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's,
and unto God the things which be God's.Our Coins are minted by
the U.S. Government.Now, Be good Christians and follow the Master,
Pay your taxes and stop the rebel rousing and silly Secession letters.BTW my fellow Mormons - Lucifer and his followers were cast out for
Rebellion, not for their plan.
@ Open Minded. Last time I checked, if a person goes to the LDS church for
welfare, he is asked to work for what he receives. Otherwise all we do is create
dependence and harm people's sprits. That's the difference.
@Mountanman;They are requested to put in some time, not required to
do so. Back when my mother was relief society president, there was one family
in our ward who was on church welfare for a long period of time and when the
bishop confronted them and asked them to put in some time, they moved to another
ward. I really wouldn't know much about it except they were neighbors, so
their situation was pretty much common knowledge. And they were "able
bodied" as well.
Eric Samuelson, you are wrong, and Obama would also say that you are wrong.
Taxes are punitive or at least used as punitive instruments.See the
recent ruling on Obamacare. The Supreme court ruled that the "fine" for
not having a health insurance plan is in fact a tax.Taxes have been
used for years to "punish" smokers by making tobacco more expensive.Since you are just some average Joe, lets see what the ever so
intelligent media is saying about taxes.From USAToday
"Obama's Tax Hike Plan Punishes Small Businesses" and "Medved:
Punishing the rich is impractical, unethical" Both articles speak of how
the Democrats (Obama) are using the tax codes to punish the wealthy.From CBS News "Forbes: Hiking capital gains tax punishes rich".It seems that the liberal media can see that taxes are used to punsih
people, why can't you?
To "Open Minded Mormon" but God has not always told his people to sit
down and shut up when it comes to people ruling over his followers.To Pharoh he said "let my people go", then proceeded to KILL and harm
the egyptians.The Sons of Mosiah went into Lamanite territory, and
rebelled against the laws of the Lamanites in order to preach to them.Jesus influenced people to abandon the law when he intervened with the
Adultress.If you want to get into a deeper discussion of politics
and how religion is reflected in it, look at this.God's plan
was for us to make our own decisions, Satan wanted to save everybody and ensure
that they all did his will. Now which political philosophy allows people to
make the most decisions on their own, and who wants to save everybody so that
not one soul is lost (even to their own bad decisions)?
Redshirt:Do the rich punish the poor by refusing to pay them enough
so that they can live without government assistance? The
tea-drenched Republican Party wants us to believe that it is unfair to stack the
deck so that a certain segment of society keeps getting a larger and larger
portion of the wealth (that's what happens over time when incomes are
unequal) and then ask them to pay a larger portion of taxes to make our society
workable over the long run. All you have to ask is where, exactly, this linear
trend will land us in 20 more years. Is this the sort of society you want to
live in? Do you really want 100 million people without basic health care? Do you
want half the population starving to death?If not, please explain
just how your vision of taxation and spending cuts will produce an equitable
society where everyone can expect to live in reasonable comfort and health
without the constant fear of slipping between the widening cracks of corporate
Redshirt:Taxes aren't punitive. I am aware that people don't
like them. But let's look at your examples: the Obamacare decision. SCOTUS
ruled that charging people money for refusing to buy insurance is a fine. I
agree, it is. The Obama administration called it a 'tax' for
political purposes; trying to get some bi-partisan support. But SCOTUS,
rightly, said 'this is punitive. It is therefore not a tax.' Making cigarettes more expensive is intended as a disincentive. It's not
punishing people who smoke, but it is trying to incentivize people to not smoke.
Also sin taxes are qualitatively different from most other taxes. The USA
Today example and the Medved example are op-ed pieces written by conservatives.
They call taxes punitive because that's what conservatives believe.
I'm not a conservative; I wrote a letter saying conservatives are wrong on
this point. But as to your larger point: the belief that raising taxes is
punitive and restricts economic growth is not supported by facts. The periods
in our history when economic growth has been most robust has historically
coincided with periods of very high taxation on rich people.
To "Kent C. DeForrest" No, the rich do not "punish" the poor.
Many of poor (not all) have made decisions where their skills are not unique.
If I can buy pencils 10 for $1, why pay $2 for the same pencils. Unfortunately
those that choose to make decisions that cut into their potential income levels
are mearly reaping the effects of their decisions.Now, if the
government decides that they will "rescue" people from their bad
decisions, where is the incentive to earn more? The studies are out there that
a single mother making $29000/yr would have to earn $69000/yr to improve her
lifestyle. So, where is the incentive to do better?Your myoptic
view of the Republican party is wrong. The Republicans want to cut government
regulation, and spending so that we can have a more even distribution of income.
Your ilk forgets that the closer you approach socialism and communism, the
larger the wealth disparity. Just look at the nations that are embracing
socialism, you have the poor and the wealthy, with very few inbetween. Look at
the US before we had all the regulation and socialistic control of the economy,
the middleclass was strong.
How many people have lost their jobs since Obama became President? With more
than 46.7 million people on welfare, were all of those companies
"mismanaged"? Did they suddenly become "mismanaged" when Obama
took office? Did the owners of those companies collectively lose their ability
to run a company?Pull your head out of the sand. Look at the
"real" picture. People are hurting. They are hurting because Obama
does not care if they have a job or if they stand in line waiting for some
bureaucrat to hand them some crumbs.Raising taxes during a recession
is completely insane. Even Obama admitted that fact. Here are his words:
"Now, I’m not going to raise taxes on anyone because when the
economy’s growing slow like this, when we're in recession you
shouldn't raise taxes on anyone."Why would Obama argue with
himself? Was he lying then or is he lying now?
Redshirt: "Now which political philosophy allows people to make the most
decisions on their own, and who wants to save everybody so that not one soul is
lost?" Why ask such rhetorical questions? The party of choice is that party
that allows people to make decisions.Lost in DC:Taxes are evil
when they create and maintain a culture of dependency, where he who is idle (the
easy-chair millionaire) eats the bread and wears the garment of the laborer (the
underpaid guy mowing his lawn).
To "Owen" what about the able bodied person that does not work who eats
bthe read, is housed, given medical care, and is given clothing at the wealthy
person's expense? By your definition taxes that support that lifestyle are
"evil when they create and maintain a culture of dependency." Using
your definition, even social security and Medicare are evil. Is that how you
view the modern welfare state, Medicare, and Social Security?That is
based on your definition.To "Eric Samuelsen" let me get this
right. Taxes are not punitive, but they are a fine?! Aren't fines meant to
be punitive? The SCOTUS declared the Obamacare fine a tax. See "Supreme
Court upholds Obamacare individual mandate as a tax" at ABC. You better get
your story straight.While you are looking up the fact that the
Supreme Court deemed the fine in Obamacare a tax, go and learn about the Laffer
curve. It is an economic theory where the more you tax a nation, you can only
tax them so much before tax revenues drop, which means that economic growth is
What is with people who want to pass the buck to others? Why would any American
who believes in America think that he is so important that someone else should
pay his tax for him? Is that what being American means? Have we become a nation
of "pass the buck" people? Are we so self centered that all we care
about is that our wallets are full while the "rich guy" has his wallet
emptied in the name of "social justice"?What kind of people
would "pass the buck"? What kind of people, when told that the
responsibility for citizenship, is paying taxes, would tell us that the
"rich guy" should pay for everything - as they enjoyed the protection
afforded by the military, the roads and all of the other things provided for in
Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution.Have we become no more than
sniveling children who whimper and complain? Part of the RESPONSIBILITY of
being an American is to participate fully in paying taxes - equally. No one is
exempt. The rich are not required to pay the taxes of those who receive the
blessings of citizenship - who think that they are exempt from responsibility.
Owen,taxes do not establish the system you describe, the millionaire
enjoying the labor of the underpaid (under-qualified and under-educated, likely
by his own bad choices) laborer.taxes supporting a wealth
re-distribution system establish the welfare and dependency mentality where
everything is owed to them because somehow someone who worked harder or had a
few lucky breaks is better off than they are
Too many of the liberals on this forum have swallowed hook, line, and sinker the
absolute LIE pushed by the Democratic party that most rich people are 1) lazy,
2) inherited their wealth, and 3) don't care about anyone poorer than
themselves.I know plenty of rich people and they work harder than
anyone else. Almost every one of them were poor or middle class while growing
up. They are the most generous people I know (and by generous, I mean they will
step in and help out voluntarily -- not that they are anxious to hand all their
money over to a government bureaucrat to throw from a helicopter).Get over your envy and bitterness that someone else has more money than you.
@Mountanman, 11:15am;#1 The private sector does drive the economy, but the
government is indisputably a major economic driver regardless of whether you
think that's a good thing or not. The government has a spending problem,
but simply cutting spending has a negative economic impact on GDP that must be
considered.#2 The government doesn't just take your tax money
out back and burn it. The money's spent, not consumed. Some goes to things
you don't like, some goes to things you do; it's part of living in a
republican democracy. Your mention of Lockheed and Boeing as exemplars of
innovation is ironic considering that the vast majority of their business comes
directly from your tax money. Believe me, I know because I'm one of those
dastardly government employees who pays them BILLIONS for national security.
It's hardly an endorsement of real capitalism! You can't argue
against government spending of your taxes and extol defense contractors in the
same breath! They're responsible for a good portion of that $16 trillion
@Mountanman (continued)#3 Free competition is good for capitalism. But
the government also has a role in breaking up monopolies, creating consumer
safety standards, and prosecuting people who cheat or harm others in pursuit of
capitalism. I'm happy that my taxes can support that role.#4
Don't pretend that government only hinders businesses. The government also
helps companies to compete by enacting laws to favor small businesses, cracking
down on monopolies, negotiating free trade agreements and opening up foreign
markets, etc. The Waltons can thank the State Department for paving the way for
our shelves to be covered in cheap Chinese goods. I'm
unconvinced that American businesses are fleeing repressive government taxes and
interference for communist, authoritarian China; rather, they're moving
there to exploit dirt-cheap labor rates that continue to be artificially pushed
down by Chinese regulations. Which highlights a criticism of capitalism
that's impacted millions of Americans - companies can move their assets
overseas without any problem, but the folks who were supposed to benefit from
free trade (US!) can't cross borders nearly as easily. The American worker
gets the short end of the stick.
I think Obama and the democrats should call the republicans on their tax
strategy bluff. Immediately the democrats should pass a law that any person
making more than 250k shall pay no taxes what so ever. Since these job creators
have no "incentive" to even get out of bed since Obama was re-elected
this should give them plenty of incentive to create jobs.These job
creators will probably become more generous to with their employees too since
they will not have to pay any taxes. Walmart will actually pay a decent wage and
stop selling stuff made in china. I can really imagine it.Of course
government has to be funded some how. We could start off with the forty seven
percent. From what I heard from republicans they are pretty worthless. They add
nothing to the economy and apparently the money they spend at businesses
disappears into the wind. The other 50 percent are just whiners. So the ninety
seven percent should fund the government because the money we spend apparently
does not drive the economy.
Redshirt, Lost in DC: Huh? My only point was to try to get you to look at the
scripture you quote from the opposite perspective. The same perspective one of
your most prominent scriptorians (Nibley) did. That is the "idle" are
usually the rich who no need to work because they rely on "laborers" who
are sometimes oppressed to the point of not having bread. As for
taxes, I have no problem with the government asking me to do something God has
already commanded me to do: provide for the less fortunate without judging
whether or how they came to be that way. Neither the government or God forces me
to do anything. But because I fear hell more than jail, I'll obey God even
though government is the vehicle for my contribution.
Eric misses the point of his own argument. The tax revenues collected via
increasing rates on those $250 K and above won't even sniff at the $16
Trillion+ debt Uncle Sam is lugging around these days. Furthermore, BHO disses
those "wealthy" with regular impunity. All this from a commander in
chief who has operated without a budget his entire Presidency and wrote checks
to anyone who bought into his self adoration. He then hammers the middle class
with huge taxes (remember the Supreme Court ruling) couched as "health care
reform" and then has the audacity to proclaim how he is preserving their
futures. Obama treats us as if we are a bunch of lab rats and he is entitled to
experiment on us as he pleases.
"The small tax hike the president is proposing is very reasonable, will have
no appreciable negative effect on the economy..."The tax
increase will have approximately zero effect on government budget and the
national debt. So, why are the Democrats so insistent?"... and
is something he proposed in every debate and campaign speech prior to the
election."But his position on taxation is not what got him
elected. What got him elected was: support for abortion, providing amnesty for
illegal immigration, support for gay marriage, that he is a minority (African
American), and tacit approval of the use of marijuana and other illegal drugs.
"Taxes are not punitive or evil in any way."Excessive taxes are punitive and evil. So is a bloated budget and a obscene
national debt."I suggest applying payroll taxes to income earned
through investments, by simply raising the ceiling from $110,000 to $300,000,
which would fully fund both Social Security and Medicare."What
you propose is just another method of redistribution. The wealthy would get
only a fraction of any SS and medicare tax paid in.
Owen,"Taxes are evil when they create and maintain a culture of
dependency, where he who is idle (the easy-chair millionaire) eats the bread and
wears the garment of the laborer (the underpaid guy mowing his lawn)."That "easy-chair millionaire" shouldn't eat the bread and
wear the garment of the "underpaid guy mowing his lawn" and should mow
his own lawn for nothing and let the unemployed guy fend for himself. The rich
man who is idle should not be dependent on others. Dependency is bad! We all
know this so if a wealthy person is dependent on others they should stop it.
Fire all those low paid people and do it themselves. They shouldn't employ
people for more than what they would pay themselves. What are they thinking? Not
only are they dependent on the laborer but they are paying them for something
they can do for nothing. I didn't realize how lazy and stupid wealthy
people were until you explained it to me. People making a low wage to mow a lawn
or do someone's laundry has to stop. Give them $30 an hour to do it or do
To "Owen" how sad. You can't even be honest enough with us to
explain what Nibley defined as an "idle person".According to
"Work We Must, But the Lunch is Free" by Nibley, states that "An
idler in the Lord's book is one who is not working for the building up of
the kingdom of God on earth and the establishment of Zion, no matter how hard he
may be working to satisfy his own greed.". So, what that means is that if a
millionaire quits working, and lives off his investments, he is not idle, if he
is working to build up God's kingdom. However, a poor person working 12
hours a day and avoiding building up God's Kingdom is an idle person.Idle and working, according to Nibley referrs to God's Kingdom, not
earning money to live.
We should all love taxes. Just look in the mirror and repeat the phrase "I
love taxes". Do this everyday before work and suddenly you will be whistling
down the sunny side of the street with the rest of the Obama zombies.
Taxes must be level to not be punitive? Say what. Even Mr Smith - who fathered
the notion of capitalism some centuries ago acknowledge that for the system to
work, the tax system needed to be progressive to have proportional liability of
taxes. I have read the most warped interpretations reality going on here.
Even those who don't pay "income" taxes, still pay many taxes
including payroll taxes, medicare, social security, property, sales, etc. Then
there are all the indirect taxes which are pass through taxes. Buy an airline
ticket - you paid federal taxes. So lets get over this myth that
there is this huge class of people that don't pay taxed.
"We should all love taxes. Just look in the mirror and repeat the phrase
"I love taxes"."You don't have to say you love
taxes.... just like I don't love mowing my lawn or cleaning out the
gutters, changing diapers, or honestly - paying tithing. But I do
all these things because they are the right thing to do.I am so
tired of all these people who want all the blessing of living in this country -
and yet when it comes to paying the tab.... oh.... no...... its not fair.
Give me a break.... love taxes. No one says you have to love
taxes. No one loves going to war for their country. No officer loves going to
domestic disputes. No doctor loves trying to pull together a life shattered by
an accident. No one loves picking up your trash that you leave at the curb once
a week. I doubt many wake up thinking they want to go out and work with hot tar
on a 90 degree day in the middle of summer - fixing pot holes in the roads you
drive on.You don't have to love what your are doing to do the
RedshirtI am very familiar with the Laffer curve. And yes, at some point,
you can tax enough to hurt an economy. I don't know any responsible
economist who would disagree. What we can say with confidence is that
we're very far from that point now.
To "Eric Samuelsen" if we are so far from the point where taxes hurt the
economy, at what point do we go over the curve? What tax rate pushes the US
over the curve?If tax rates are no so high that they cause problems
for the economy, explain why businesses are firing people and are shrinking
rather than growing as the Obamacare taxes begin to take effect.
Though I agree with Mr. Samuelsen here or there on his posts over the years I
will disagree on whether taxes are punitive. Certainly, the can be punitive. If
they are too high, they are punitive. If they are put on the people without
their consent or representation, they are punitive. This sometimes occurs and
has occurred in our history. I would say some taxes that are ill conceived,
whether it was intentional or not, are punitive. I am not a fan of sin taxes
and I'm not a fan of sales taxes on food items. Both seem to hit the poor
harder than the rich.
Redshirt:To disagree with you, I don't think taxes are the
reason why we are in a mess. Tax rates were as high or higher during
Reagan's terms and the economy generally prospered. The tax rates were
certainly higher in the 1950's and our economy was humming. I think we can
get taxed too much but we also must keep some historical perspective.
Redshirt how like you to pick the only Nibley reference to the idle (among at
least six) that does not refer to the idle rich.
RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTSo, what that means is that if a
millionaire quits working, and lives off his investments, he is not idle, if he
is working to build up God's kingdom.=========== Then I will look forward to Mitt Romney (or any other Mormon Millionares) to
be called as a Mission Presidents or such...You know - Time,
To "LDS Liberal" did you see that Romney just got a new job? He is now
on the board of directors for the Marriott hotels.Beyond that, I
look forward to not knowing what church calling Mitt Romney or any other
millionaire has. For all anybody knows, Mitt could be called to be a Nursery
leader or a Cub Scout Den leader, both help to build the Kingdom of God. Remove
the beam from your eye before worrying about the mote in anybody elses.Why do you insist that any Mormon Millionaire be called to be a Mission
President or other similar calligns? Isn't a Sunbeam teacher just as
valuable as a Mission President?
re:UtahBlueDevilYou seem to think that taxes are what makes our
world so great. It isn't taxes to the federal government that has separated
America from the rest of the communist world - it is the free enterprise market.
Yes UtahBlueDevil it is freedom FROM taxes that generates economic growth which
in turn generates jobs and prosperity for all classes of people. Interestingly
enough - in 2007 when the Bush tax cuts began the US revenue to the Federal
Government was at an all time high. The reason was because FREEDOM from taxes
allowed small business to expand and hire and more tax payers means more tax
dollars. Look it up - 2007 was a GREAT year for revenue. Obviously every country
needs a minimal tax system to support basic functions in society but it is when
that tax burden becomes so great that it destroys prosperity that we really
ought to take a second look - ya think???
redshirt:I was also thinking about a lot of uncontrolled greed on
wall street. I would even add, dare say, that the American people generally are
to blame for living way beyond our means and relying on our homes as a financial
plan. I know that last statement isn't popular with a lot of people...
REDSHIRT: Liar is such a strong word. Here's one from Appraching Zion. For
others do your own simple homework. "The director of a
Latter-day Saint Institute was recently astounded when [I] pointed out to him
that the ancient teaching that the idler shall not eat the bread of the laborer
has always meant that the idle rich shall not eat the bread of the laboring
poor, as they always have. . . . He had always been taught that the idle poor
should not eat the bread of the laboring rich, because it is perfectly obvious
that a poor man has not worked as hard as a rich man. With the same lucid logic
my Latter-day Saint students tell me that [the reason] there were no poor in the
Zion of Enoch [was] because only the well-to-do were admitted to the city."