The rich are waging class warfare on the poor

Discussion in 'Economics' started by failed_trad3r, Jul 26, 2011.

  1. Unfortunately both parties, rep and dem, are keyneyian parties and unlikely to change their ways. The tea party is unlikely to make changes in the rep party, because the rep are responsible for over 75% of the national debt and even bigger spenders than the dems. Thus forcing balanced budget onto the party which has shown the most inability to do exactly that is likely to fail:( :( :( if there was a dem tea party i would think they would be able to be more successful.
     
    #131     Jul 29, 2011
  2. Neither party is "keyneyian". Keynes advocated storing up surpluses, not running deficits, during the good years.
     
    #132     Jul 29, 2011
  3. MKTrader

    MKTrader

    Not necessarily. It depends on each particular administration. Obama has outspent all of his predecessors from both parties. And if you look at long-term burdens like SS and (especially) Medicare, well, you know who started those. To be fair, similar arguments can be made about some Republicans and their war machine build-up.

    Off the top of my head, I don't know where LBJ's spending stacks up, but he was the worst of both worlds--too much welfare state and warfare state. It's similar to what we have now.
     
    #133     Jul 29, 2011
  4. Betapeg

    Betapeg

    We need to raise taxes AND cut spending. Republicans AND Democrats are right on both things here. Obama made clear they had a bill that would do this while not throwing a wrench into the economic recovery. I have to give Obama and Boehner credit for trying to work to together on this, despite their rhetoric.
     
    #134     Jul 29, 2011
  5. bone

    bone

    Lucid and concise.

    My regards.

    Flat tax, no deductions.
     
    #135     Jul 29, 2011
  6. Hey, dude, get a clue. You clearly missed the point of that. If Buffett pays $3M in federal taxes, do you think he gets $3M in benefits? Do you even understand the concept of cost allocation? Your whole "tax dollars pay" blah, blah, blah, takes that into effect. I pay $1 in tax for every .80 I get in benefits. That ratio should be $1 to $1. The feds are ripping me off to the tune of 20% on every buck. In fact, every taxpayer who makes over about $120K gets screwed. The rest of you get more than $1 for every $1 you pay, so whoop it up losers.

    I don't support universal healthcare. I support you paying your own friggin way. Why in the world would I want to pay .01 toward your health care? I don't know you and I don't want to know you, so I don't really care if you get health care or don't.
     
    #136     Jul 29, 2011
  7. Typical Leftist superficial analysis of this data.

    Wanna bet that the majority of the tax revenue from blue states comes from people who vote red? After all, the GOP is the "party of the rich", right? So, before breaking your blue arm patting yourself on the back for providing all that tax revenue, you should realize that you, Mr. Blue Individual Taxpayer, don't really provide jack squat to the red states. It's "red" individuals like me, who live in blue states for business reasons that were set in motion 100 years ago, when the entire country was more red than blue, who pay the taxes. You "blue" losers just try to glom on to the credit.

    Plus, those red states have a boatload of military installations, which just so happen to be one of the few things actually justifiable by the Constitution.
     
    #137     Jul 29, 2011
  8. MKTrader

    MKTrader

    There's a HUGE amount of spending we can cut before even thinking about raising taxes. I'm talking about entire Federal agencies. Take the Dep't of Energy. It was created in that late 70s to "reduce our dependence on foreign oil." It's now a huge, wasteful bureacracy with 16,000 employees and $24 billion annual budget. And guess what? We import more oil than ever. 30+ years of an epic failure. But is anyone talking about putting them on the chopping block? Heavens no. If anything, they'll probably grow under Obama.

    That's just one example. There are hundreds of others. All this class warfare talk of "the richest must pay" is a diversion. It's just playing on people's envy and frustrations. A massive amount of pork-cutting needs to happen before a penny is raised on anyone's taxes (rich or poor).
     
    #138     Jul 29, 2011
  9. yeah.. i disagree. China is communist, not capitalist imo. So rep and dem are both keynesian, not austrian imo.

    obama is a great equalizer, but until he has 3 more years of 1,7 trillion deficit, still the reps will be bigger spenders (interest payments have alot to do with it) and theres only 2 more years left.
     
    #139     Jul 30, 2011
  10. LeeD

    LeeD

    IMHO, China is both

    If we are talking of "professional politicians", in their majority they are Keynesian. There are a few notable exceptions like Ron Paul (rep) and Dennis Kucinich (dem).
     
    #140     Jul 30, 2011