sparkling husband dude discusses taxes

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1882027

Oh my.

Remember, the sparkling husband dude lives in the third-richest county of all the 50 states in the union; apparently it's more affluent than even Beverly Hills or Cape Cod or the Polaroid Kid's town in affluent Connecticut. 

Stinky The Clown  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 07:24 PM
Original message

"Tax cuts for the middle class"

This is a very dangerous phrase. It continues the RIGHT WING claim ghat cutting taxes results in jobs.

We don't need tax cuts for the middle class. We need much higher taxes on the rich. **That** is the phrase any real progressive would be using.

Claudia Jones (76 posts)      Mon Sep-05-11 07:26 PM
Response to Original message

1. agreed

That reinforces a right wing theme. Besides, the "middle class" doesn't exist anymore.

Sherman A1  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
 
2. Precisely

There is no middle class anymore or just a very few left. We need as you said much higher taxes on the rich.

Autumn  (1000+ posts)      Mon Sep-05-11 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
 
3. I didn't listen. Did he say entitlement cuts for the poor?

Last thing we need are more tax cuts.

WHEN CRABS ROAR (1000+ posts)      Mon Sep-05-11 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
 
5. They have been cut on enough. Stop the bleeding.

LiberalFighter  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
 
6. Citizens need to take responsibility and pay their taxes.

Reduce some of the deductions that taxpayers can take. Such as having a limit on mortgage deduction.

Have more tax brackets and lower the rates for the lower brackets.

unblock (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
 
8. i disagree with the premise that the right owns all tax cuts.
 
tax cuts for the middle class aren't necessarily about job creation, they're also about simply helping the middle class through extraordinary economic times. that's certainly a progressive notion.

that said, taxes and unemployment are related, only the relationship is, naturally, vastly more complex than the right wing would have you believe. the right wing meme is that the top marginal income tax rates and corporate income tax rates are the only ones that matter, and that wherever you are, lower always results in more job creation.

the reality is that marginal tax rates do play a role, but so do expectations of future marginal tax rates, the differential between the marginal tax rates for different types of income, and the distribution of income (which is affected by tax rates), among other things.

the economy is neither left- nor right-wing, it does what it does and responds to different solutions differently depending on the actual problems. in this case, the economy is demand-starved, particularly among the poor and middle class, so any way you get more money into their hands will help the economy and lead to more jobs.

so it actually is a job creation strategy, not because tax cuts always create jobs, but because it actually addresses one of the biggest reasons for the lack of jobs.

Stinky The Clown  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
 
9. I, too, disagree

I understand your theory, and in different times, it might help. I just think, right now, that there is enough stimulative effect from this. At most, such a tax cut will allow a few people to buy a new (offshore made) flat screen teevee.

By taxing the rich until their eyes bleed, and penalizing cash hoarding corporations, including capital repatriation, we raise the money to pay for massive public spending. We need jobs and middle class confidence. That will come of lowered unemployment and long term job prospects doing meaningful work rebuilding the country.

A few hundred in tax relief is little more than a sugar high.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

According to DUmbass economic theory spending spurs production. While they never get around to explaining how one is supposed to make purchases prior to the production or where the capital for production comes from prior to purchase they nonetheless insist spending will spur the economy; hence the "stimulus."

That said, they obviously hate prosperity and love their ideology so much they will reject their own economic theories just to begrudge the middle class a tax cut lest our side be proven correct.

[thundley4]

LiberalFighter  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
 
6. Citizens need to take responsibility and pay their taxes.

Reduce some of the deductions that taxpayers can take. Such as having a limit on mortgage deduction.

Have more tax brackets and lower the rates for the lower brackets.

51% pay no income taxes right now, and you want to increase that? DUmass.

[MrsSmith]

I just love the disconnect in their "thinking."  If you increase taxes on cigarettes, gasoline, sugary drinks, and fatty foods, people will stop buying as much of those things.  If you increase taxes on business owners and their businesses, and massively increase the cost of hiring new employees, you will NOT stop them from investing and hiring.  

[jukin]

I don't need to read the excretion of the sparkly.  I'm going to go all in on it is for them unelss it has to pay them.....then not so much. 

Much resist.

[USA4ME]

unblock
 
tax cuts for the middle class aren't necessarily about job creation, they're also about simply helping the middle class through extraordinary economic times. that's certainly a progressive notion.

In that case, progressives need to call for the repeal of the sales tax which is a very regressive tax, especially on the poor.  How come there's not thread after thread on Skin's island demanding the repeal of the sales tax?

Simply put, despite their claim libs are not in favor of less taxes for anyone.  They just want more, and the best place for them to start is the top 1%.  Were it ever to happen that the current crop of the top 1% were taxed into non-existance, they'll target the new top 1%, until one day the "top 1%" are those who are making any income at all.

.

[Skul]

Stinkdude is right.
Tax the shit out of everybody.
That's the ticket, stinkdude.
freaking moron

[NHSparky]

Dude, who is the last poor person to sign your paycheck?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Claudia Jones (76 posts)      Mon Sep-05-11 07:26 PM
Response to Original message

1. agreed

That reinforces a right wing theme. Besides, the "middle class" doesn't exist anymore.

Seriously, WTF?  About everyone I know is "middle class", or at least what I consider to be middle class.  Many of my friends own $300-$500k houses, make probably a household income between $100/$200k per year.  That's middle class to me.

Unless myself and my friends are actually rich....you never know what exactly the DUmmies consider to be "rich" or "middle class".  Of course, they pretty much think that anyone who makes more money than them are rich.

[Rebel]

Stinky The Clown  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-05-11 07:24 PM
Original message

"Tax cuts for the middle class"

This is a very dangerous phrase. It continues the RIGHT WING claim ghat cutting taxes results in jobs.

We don't need tax cuts for the middle class. We need much higher taxes on the rich. **That** is the phrase any real progressive would be using.

How much do you pay in income tax, fool? No, not payroll, INCOME.

[BlueStateSaint]

Hey, ain't the Stinkster a slumlord in Baltimore?  He can pay higher taxes first!

[Erasmus]

Another brain dead liberal who has no concept of math.  You can tax the so-called "rich" at 100% and you STILL won't put a dent in the deficit.  But you will kill a lot of jobs in the process.

How these people are able to get the fork to their own mouths boggles my mind.

[Karin]

Dude, who is the last poor person to sign your paycheck?

Possibly one of his tenants.  Then again, it's likely that it's section 8, so there goes that theory.  At any rate, I don't think that Stinky is giving away rent-free housing, even though "all of this shit should be free."  

[DumbAss Tanker]

Hey, ain't the Stinkster a slumlord in Baltimore?  He can pay higher taxes first!

Ironically, "Passive" income like rents will likely be a preferred target in Congress, since the Republicans will fight to protect captial gains and the 'Rats will fight to protect wage income, but neither one has a vested interest in protecting rents, royalties, and such. 

Ideally they would screw with the rate at which he depreciates the properties, which is where most such slumlords make their real money, combining it with all the expenses and mortgage payments to offset all the rent receipts on paper to present a low return or loss while banking the difference.

 

[Erasmus]

Yeah, and we know rental income is a favorite type of income for Democrat politicians to "forget to report" on their tax returns.