[quote]Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, luck does play a large role in determining whether or not you get rich.
But luck is NOT a huge factor in determining whether or not you’re poor. People who are poor are more often than not at fault. People who are rich are often those who just had a lot of luck when they were trying to not be poor.[/quote]
I think when some one lives in an area that is economically depressed, luck is a bigger factor. Also I think something that needs addressed is we are not necessarily speaking of the homeless and jobless this is also about the working poor, people with good work ethics
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, luck does play a large role in determining whether or not you get rich.
But luck is NOT a huge factor in determining whether or not you’re poor. People who are poor are more often than not at fault. People who are rich are often those who just had a lot of luck when they were trying to not be poor.
I think when some one lives in an area that is economically depressed, luck is a bigger factor. Also I think something that needs addressed is we are not necessarily speaking of the homeless and jobless this is also about the working poor, people with good work ethics[/quote]
Up until recently the US had a pretty darn good job market.
And you can always move to where the jobs are. Not wanting to live in bumfuck nowhere isn’t a reason to blame luck.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
The whole point is simple really:
Those with “Bush Derangement Syndrome”, or more generally “Republican Derangement Syndrome” build arguments on fantasies rather than facts.
The whole “… give rich tax breaks” is a farce.
I live in Maine, where we are most years the highest taxed state (ie full tax burden) in the US. Last year, there were 2 states that had negative economic growth: Louisiana and Maine.
Louisiana had Hurricane Katrina. Maine had 30 years of Leftist Democrat policies that have steadily driven out businesses for those 30 years. One of the biggest stories this week was another fishery closed (read many jobs) because of more stringent state gov’t regulation and ‘selective’ taxation. That business will go to another state.
People who complain about ‘the rich’ are too full of class envy to get on with themselves.
As a small business entrepeneur, what’s my incentive to grow my business if, after 20 years, I’m finally making $200k, and now considered ‘rich’, so I’m thrust into a new tax bracket that effectively caps my business from growing?
[/quote]
You are bringing in Bush into this discussion , I personally have nothing against his tax cuts , what I do have problems with is he spends America�??s money like never before and then he thinks he can reduce America�??s income , with not consequences .
You are bringing in Bush into this discussion , I personally have nothing against his tax cuts , what I do have problems with is he spends America�??s money like never before and then he thinks he can reduce America�??s income , with not consequences .
[/quote]
That’s fair. He is not the Fiscal Conservative he claimed to be.
However, the reference is valid as: 1) This thread and the article are about ‘his’ tax cuts, and 2) His opponents often use their non-support of them for their electoral platforms (ie ‘He’ or ‘They’ want to give tax cuts to the rich…)
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, luck does play a large role in determining whether or not you get rich.
But luck is NOT a huge factor in determining whether or not you’re poor. People who are poor are more often than not at fault. People who are rich are often those who just had a lot of luck when they were trying to not be poor.
I think when some one lives in an area that is economically depressed, luck is a bigger factor. Also I think something that needs addressed is we are not necessarily speaking of the homeless and jobless this is also about the working poor, people with good work ethics
Up until recently the US had a pretty darn good job market.
And you can always move to where the jobs are. Not wanting to live in bumfuck nowhere isn’t a reason to blame luck.[/quote]
That’s true, but then you can also simply not have the money left to move if you get hit at the wrong time.
You are bringing in Bush into this discussion , I personally have nothing against his tax cuts , what I do have problems with is he spends America�??s money like never before and then he thinks he can reduce America�??s income , with not consequences .
That’s fair. He is not the Fiscal Conservative he claimed to be.
However, the reference is valid as: 1) This thread and the article are about ‘his’ tax cuts, and 2) His opponents often use their non-support of them for their electoral platforms (ie ‘He’ or ‘They’ want to give tax cuts to the rich…)[/quote]
We can not afford tax cuts at this time we are at war on two fronts, who is going to pay for it, our grand Children that is who. We are fucking the next generation
If I understand the article it is saying, the rich are paying more taxes and the debt keeps going up, Go figure. CUT SPENDING that seems more logical.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, luck does play a large role in determining whether or not you get rich.
But luck is NOT a huge factor in determining whether or not you’re poor. People who are poor are more often than not at fault. People who are rich are often those who just had a lot of luck when they were trying to not be poor.
I think when some one lives in an area that is economically depressed, luck is a bigger factor. Also I think something that needs addressed is we are not necessarily speaking of the homeless and jobless this is also about the working poor, people with good work ethics
Up until recently the US had a pretty darn good job market.
And you can always move to where the jobs are. Not wanting to live in bumfuck nowhere isn’t a reason to blame luck.
That’s true, but then you can also simply not have the money left to move if you get hit at the wrong time. [/quote]
Who can afford to move if the jobs do not pay a livable wage
Who can afford to move if the jobs do not pay a livable wage
i moved 2 or 3 times while being broke.[/quote]
Impossible. Those without money cannot operate of their own volition and must rely on government handouts. If you are born poor in the United States you are doomed to stay poor. It’s true - a liberal said so and also said I had to agree or else I was an asshole.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
If I understand the article it is saying, the rich are paying more taxes and the debt keeps going up, Go figure. CUT SPENDING that seems more logical.
[/quote]
No argument here. This all falls back to ‘minimalism’ in government.
What are the facts here? The below WSJ article says the rich are getting richer and “Meanwhile, the average tax rate of the wealthiest 1% fell to its lowest level in at least 18 years.”
So, exactly how are the wealthiest 1% paying so much more in taxes than before? Is it because the 1% are getting so much richer, driving out the middle class, and closing the tax gap caused by the disappearing middle class and big corporate tax breaks?
[quote]Petedacook wrote:
What are the facts here? The below WSJ article says the rich are getting richer and “Meanwhile, the average tax rate of the wealthiest 1% fell to its lowest level in at least 18 years.”
So, exactly how are the wealthiest 1% paying so much more in taxes than before? Is it because the 1% are getting so much richer, driving out the middle class, and closing the tax gap caused by the disappearing middle class and big corporate tax breaks?
[/quote]
How are the rich driving out the middle class? Thank your (assume are American)goverment for that. The fact that corporations is part of it.
What tax gap? Are tax revenues decreasing? They’re growing in comparrison to GDP. Our gov’t is trying to put the middle class on the dole. If the “poor” take more than they pay and the “middle class” is taking more than they pay in, who is left with the bill? Just the people and corporations that provide jobs and create wealth for the whole country. Yeah, that makes sense.
[quote]Petedacook wrote:
What are the facts here? The below WSJ article says the rich are getting richer and “Meanwhile, the average tax rate of the wealthiest 1% fell to its lowest level in at least 18 years.”
So, exactly how are the wealthiest 1% paying so much more in taxes than before? Is it because the 1% are getting so much richer, driving out the middle class, and closing the tax gap caused by the disappearing middle class and big corporate tax breaks?
[/quote]
I would also like to suggest that you read the article that you posted. The account for 22% of income and pay 40% of the tax. Does that sound equitible to you? Sounds like redistibution of wealth to me.
I would also like to suggest that you read the article that you posted. The account for 22% of income and pay 40% of the tax. Does that sound equitible to you? Sounds like redistibution of wealth to me.[/quote]
Does 1% of the population paying 40% of the taxes sound equitable…no it does not. The fact remains the average tax rate of the wealthiest 1% is at its lowest in 18 years.
Does 3% of the population controlling over 90% of the wealth sound equitable to you?
