Nor should they. Interventionists who support US military actions won’t join the military themselves; won’t encourage their children to join the military; and certainly won’t make voluntary contributions to support the war efforts, beyond token support to charities which aid US veterans groups, if even that.
It is so easy to be in favor of tax cuts. It’s such a personal sacrifice to accept a tax cut. A true patriot accepts his tax cut.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
Nan G
13 years ago
Some of those 1%’ers are smart enough to know that no amount of money they could ever give to the gov’t would make a dent in the debt so long as we spend like drunken sailors.
The Internal Revenue Service’s own statistics indicate that if the entire top 1 percent of all taxpayers were taxed at a rate of 100 percent, it would net only $938 billion!
And that would be a one-time thing.
People would all scramble to find ways to not be in the top 1% from then on.
openid.aol.com/runnswim
13 years ago
Hi Nan, All of us need to pay more taxes, to dig ourselves out of the hole we’ve dug for ourselves. We cut our taxes without cutting our spending. You can say that it was a spending problem and not a taxing problem, but the truth is that a true conservative cuts spending and, only then, rewards himself with a tax cut.
A true conservative doesn’t cut taxes first, make up for the shortfall by borrowing, and then engage in entirely wishful thinking that spending will magically cut itself or that companies will invest their greater after tax profits in growing their business, as opposed to paying bonuses and dividends.
One thing which is never considered is that, with higher tax rates, there’s more incentive to leave money inside the business, to grow the business, than to treat the business like a piggy bank.
Anyway, no one ever said that bringing back tax levels on the 1% back to 1990s levels was the solution to all our economic ills, any more than cutting discretionary spending is the answer to all our economic ills. But it makes perfect sense to cut unnecessary discretionary spending and it makes perfect sense to raise tax rates on the top 1% back to that of the 1990s. Once the economy is on sounder footing, everyone else’s taxes should go back to those levels, as well.
Larry: All of us need to pay more taxes, to dig ourselves out of the hole we’ve dug for ourselves. We cut our taxes without cutting our spending. You can say that it was a spending problem and not a taxing problem, but the truth is that a true conservative cuts spending and, only then, rewards himself with a tax cut.
From 1960 to 2010, the share of federal spending going for “payments to individuals” (Social Security, food stamps, Medicare and the like) climbed from 26 percent to 66 percent. Meanwhile, the tax burden barely budged. In 1960, federal taxes were 17.8 percent of national income (gross domestic product). In 2007, they were 18.5 percent of GDP.
The spending problem was begat back in the 30’s,and compounded in the middle 60s. After that, it became a runaway train. The only way the predictable ponzi scheme failure wouldn’t happen is if government were shrunk to accommodate for baseline increase in entitlement spending. Despite what ever intent at the origin, both entitlement programs are the key to US failure. Without reform, that failure will succeed.
Larry: Interventionists who support US military actions won’t join the military themselves; won’t encourage their children to join the military; and certainly won’t make voluntary contributions to support the war efforts, beyond token support to charities which aid US veterans groups, if even that.
You base such a blanket statement… er judgement… on exactly what, Larry? Shame on you for hyperbole.
Nor should they. Interventionists who support US military actions won’t join the military themselves; won’t encourage their children to join the military; and certainly won’t make voluntary contributions to support the war efforts, beyond token support to charities which aid US veterans groups, if even that.
It is so easy to be in favor of tax cuts. It’s such a personal sacrifice to accept a tax cut. A true patriot accepts his tax cut.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
Some of those 1%’ers are smart enough to know that no amount of money they could ever give to the gov’t would make a dent in the debt so long as we spend like drunken sailors.
The Internal Revenue Service’s own statistics indicate that if the entire top 1 percent of all taxpayers were taxed at a rate of 100 percent, it would net only $938 billion!
And that would be a one-time thing.
People would all scramble to find ways to not be in the top 1% from then on.
Hi Nan, All of us need to pay more taxes, to dig ourselves out of the hole we’ve dug for ourselves. We cut our taxes without cutting our spending. You can say that it was a spending problem and not a taxing problem, but the truth is that a true conservative cuts spending and, only then, rewards himself with a tax cut.
A true conservative doesn’t cut taxes first, make up for the shortfall by borrowing, and then engage in entirely wishful thinking that spending will magically cut itself or that companies will invest their greater after tax profits in growing their business, as opposed to paying bonuses and dividends.
One thing which is never considered is that, with higher tax rates, there’s more incentive to leave money inside the business, to grow the business, than to treat the business like a piggy bank.
Anyway, no one ever said that bringing back tax levels on the 1% back to 1990s levels was the solution to all our economic ills, any more than cutting discretionary spending is the answer to all our economic ills. But it makes perfect sense to cut unnecessary discretionary spending and it makes perfect sense to raise tax rates on the top 1% back to that of the 1990s. Once the economy is on sounder footing, everyone else’s taxes should go back to those levels, as well.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
Words to ponder, Larry… from an article you have likely not read.
The spending problem was begat back in the 30’s,and compounded in the middle 60s. After that, it became a runaway train. The only way the predictable ponzi scheme failure wouldn’t happen is if government were shrunk to accommodate for baseline increase in entitlement spending. Despite what ever intent at the origin, both entitlement programs are the key to US failure. Without reform, that failure will succeed.
You base such a blanket statement… er judgement… on exactly what, Larry? Shame on you for hyperbole.