Jump to content

One principle that stands above all others: personal accountability


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JimmyBT said:

The next generation claims they’re smarter. I don’t see it.  You asked for an example I gave one. 

Which example? Just that billionaires donate money? Which ones? Who are we talking about? How much did they donate? 

Details more than, 'I read somewhere about a thing' would help. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jross said:

Great question.  What do you think should be done?

Return to 1944-63 income tax rates. 

Close tax loopholes. 

Fully fund the IRS

Break up monopolies.

Get money out of politics. 

Glass-Steagall. Make Banking Boring Again! 

Increase estate tax. 

Some of the richest people in the world pay little to no taxes on their wealth. That should change. 

A lot of these ideas comes from the fact that we cannot trust that they are holding themselves accountable. So someone has to. 

Systematically decrease defense spending. 

Increase education spending. Pre-K. Free school breakfast/lunch programs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe in one tax rate regardless of income that is accurately enforced. I know, shit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one gathers first. But, I don’t believe in “you make more money so you owe a higher ratio of your money.  Even at a single rate if a person makes more money they are contributing more in taxes. I don’t make a lot of money, but let them do their thing.  I believe most would be less likely to try to ‘cheat’ the system if the system was the same for everyone.  
 

then again I’m smart enough to know I’m not smart enough to have it all figured out….

  • Bob 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I believe in one tax rate regardless of income that is accurately enforced. I know, shit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one gathers first. But, I don’t believe in “you make more money so you owe a higher ratio of your money.  Even at a single rate if a person makes more money they are contributing more in taxes. I don’t make a lot of money, but let them do their thing.  I believe most would be less likely to try to ‘cheat’ the system if the system was the same for everyone.  
 

then again I’m smart enough to know I’m not smart enough to have it all figured out….

This is essentially how my brain thinks about taxes.  I just don't understand why it isn't the same % for everyone....people that don't make as much don't pay as much...people that make more pay more.  

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that the Uber wealthy pay LOWER taxes than middle class due to tax shelters and other business owner loopholes. 

 

The wealthy also get all of their money from the middle class and poor so some progression is 100% appropriate. 

A flat tax rate will result in even more accumulation at the top and hurt the economy. The rich don't spend most of their money. They hoard it. 

Edited by red viking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, red viking said:

The problem is that the Uber wealthy pay LOWER taxes than middle class due to tax shelters and other business owner loopholes. 

 

The wealthy also get all of their money from the middle class and poor so some progression is 100% appropriate. 

A flat tax rate will result in even more accumulation at the top and hurt the economy. The rich don't spend most of their money. They hoard it. 

Man you have a skewed way of looking at things.  The only thing you said that is remotely true is that there are tax shelters and loopholes.  While I don't always agree with them, some of them are there for a reason.  The rest of what you said is just wackadoodle stuff.  You do realize that without the business the wealthy people run wouldn't have jobs, right?!?!  So middle class get all THEIR money from the wealthy.  And the idea that the rich "hoard it" is as ridiculous as it comes.  

I love asking these questions to people like you that just blanketly hate people who have more money than them.  How much money do you think company CEO's should make?  Do you know what it takes to build up a company and run one?  What have the big bad "rich" people done to you to hate them so much?  By the way...you do realize the big bad rich R's are the biggest philanthropists out there, right?!

  • Jagger 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Man you have a skewed way of looking at things.  The only thing you said that is remotely true is that there are tax shelters and loopholes.  While I don't always agree with them, some of them are there for a reason.  The rest of what you said is just wackadoodle stuff.  You do realize that without the business the wealthy people run wouldn't have jobs, right?!?!  So middle class get all THEIR money from the wealthy.  And the idea that the rich "hoard it" is as ridiculous as it comes.  

I love asking these questions to people like you that just blanketly hate people who have more money than them.  How much money do you think company CEO's should make?  Do you know what it takes to build up a company and run one?  What have the big bad "rich" people done to you to hate them so much?  By the way...you do realize the big bad rich R's are the biggest philanthropists out there, right?!

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-highest-paid-ceos/#:~:text=Rising Median CEO Income Hits,S%26P 500 companies has doubled.&text=In 2021%2C this number hit,slightly fell to %2414.5 million.

What non-nefarious reason could a person use a tax shelter? 

Not all rich people run businesses. 

What would happen to workers of companies, if rich CEO's or executives, had their salaries cut over time to a more reasonable or less outrageous(in some peoples' minds) amount? 

Some of the rich do hoard their wealth. Living off loans from banks rather than taking taxable salary. Using stocks as collateral to live the life of a rich person while paying little to no taxes. Bezos does this exact scheme and it is a scheme. I'll be they aren't the only one. Does every rich person(top 1%) hoard their wealth? Probably not. Bezos's ex is trying desperately to give it all away but it so much the interest keeps refilling the coffers. 

You say the person 'hates' rich people. Seems like you're telling someone what they believe again. With out any evidence to base that on. You defend rich people and businesses quite frequently with little more than the anecdote of ' rich businesses pay workers' as if it is a point. Why? What do you know that we should? 

How do you square the 'accountability' question with CEO's getting such increases in compensation when workers don't share the same growth? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-highest-paid-ceos/#:~:text=Rising Median CEO Income Hits,S%26P 500 companies has doubled.&text=In 2021%2C this number hit,slightly fell to %2414.5 million.

What non-nefarious reason could a person use a tax shelter? 

Not all rich people run businesses. 

What would happen to workers of companies, if rich CEO's or executives, had their salaries cut over time to a more reasonable or less outrageous(in some peoples' minds) amount? 

Some of the rich do hoard their wealth. Living off loans from banks rather than taking taxable salary. Using stocks as collateral to live the life of a rich person while paying little to no taxes. Bezos does this exact scheme and it is a scheme. I'll be they aren't the only one. Does every rich person(top 1%) hoard their wealth? Probably not. Bezos's ex is trying desperately to give it all away but it so much the interest keeps refilling the coffers. 

You say the person 'hates' rich people. Seems like you're telling someone what they believe again. With out any evidence to base that on. You defend rich people and businesses quite frequently with little more than the anecdote of ' rich businesses pay workers' as if it is a point. Why? What do you know that we should? 

How do you square the 'accountability' question with CEO's getting such increases in compensation when workers don't share the same growth? 

First bold: How would someone take RV's post as other then for some reason they dislike rich people when all they do is regurgitate the negative troupes about them.

Second bold:  Because they run the company and take on all the risk.  If you want to make more money as a worker, work harder for a better position, change careers if needed, get more education, do something for yourself.  Some act as if every single CEO/Executive do absolutely nothing or have done nothing to get to where they are.  Even if someone was just "given" an executive position they would still have to know how to do it otherwise they would get booted by the board.  Are there bad apples and terrible CEO's/Executives....of course!  But to just blanketly bash these people because they make a lot of money is ridiculous.  And this crazy believe that they "hoard their money" and don't give enough away to help others is asinine.  What are they supposed to do spend/give as much of their money away that they have to live month to month?

I would respect people like you and RV if you just blatantly said what you truly feel, ie., 100% distribution of wealth no matter what someone brings to the table.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Which example? Just that billionaires donate money? Which ones? Who are we talking about? How much did they donate? 

Details more than, 'I read somewhere about a thing' would help. 

Try reading. The amounts in my comment. Need fewer words and more pictures or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

This is essentially how my brain thinks about taxes.  I just don't understand why it isn't the same % for everyone....people that don't make as much don't pay as much...people that make more pay more.  

That would be too easy.  Even the L wingers could figure it out then 

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s amazing how little L wingers understand about business.  They think it’s simple to run a multi billion dollar company. I was glad the CEO(s) that ran the company I worked for were making what they were.  They were making decisions for 15 years down the road that ensured a viable company is still there.  The good ones are worth every penny.  Put someone in those roles and pay them peanuts and you’ll find out.   

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

First bold: How would someone take RV's post as other then for some reason they dislike rich people when all they do is regurgitate the negative troupes about them.

Second bold:  Because they run the company and take on all the risk.  If you want to make more money as a worker, work harder for a better position, change careers if needed, get more education, do something for yourself.  Some act as if every single CEO/Executive do absolutely nothing or have done nothing to get to where they are.  Even if someone was just "given" an executive position they would still have to know how to do it otherwise they would get booted by the board.  Are there bad apples and terrible CEO's/Executives....of course!  But to just blanketly bash these people because they make a lot of money is ridiculous.  And this crazy believe that they "hoard their money" and don't give enough away to help others is asinine.  What are they supposed to do spend/give as much of their money away that they have to live month to month?

I would respect people like you and RV if you just blatantly said what you truly feel, ie., 100% distribution of wealth no matter what someone brings to the table.

I think I’ll tip over when they admit they’re communists thru and thru 

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

This is essentially how my brain thinks about taxes.  I just don't understand why it isn't the same % for everyone....people that don't make as much don't pay as much...people that make more pay more.  

Interestingly, WA state constitution states that a commodity (land, money, whatever) if taxed must be taxed at the same rate.   This is why all property taxes are by mill rate.  Your property has the same percentage taken away as richer properties and poorer properties.  

WA has no state income tax.   It could, but everyone would be taxed at the same rate.   That is not good enough for Ds.   So they have schemed and tried to figure out ways to tax income.   The latest is a capital gains tax that every state and the Feds consider income.   No, for WA it is being called an excise tax.   That new law is about to go down in flames in an initiative this Nov. 

But again, a flat rate tax is no good and the Ds won't implement that because they want a graduated income tax which is specifically prohibited by the Constitution.   So as a result, we have no income tax.   Which I think most here are happy about.  

mspart

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mspart said:

Interestingly, WA state constitution states that a commodity (land, money, whatever) if taxed must be taxed at the same rate.   This is why all property taxes are by mill rate.  Your property has the same percentage taken away as richer properties and poorer properties.  

WA has no state income tax.   It could, but everyone would be taxed at the same rate.   That is not good enough for Ds.   So they have schemed and tried to figure out ways to tax income.   The latest is a capital gains tax that every state and the Feds consider income.   No, for WA it is being called an excise tax.   That new law is about to go down in flames in an initiative this Nov. 

But again, a flat rate tax is no good and the Ds won't implement that because they want a graduated income tax which is specifically prohibited by the Constitution.   So as a result, we have no income tax.   Which I think most here are happy about.  

mspart

Interesting how different states do things differently.  I am surprised that WA doesn't have income tax...wish where I lived there wasn't any.  And I could go on and on about capital gains but will save that for a different time...oh and the estate tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, WA is a blue state.   You could call it a deep blue state where the people are actually moderate.   They lean conservative on some things and liberal on others.  But they vote D.  

So it is weird we don't have an income tax.   But it is nice not having to deal with those state forms.  I lived in MN and HI and hated that rigamarole.  

mspart

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, red viking said:

The problem is that the Uber wealthy pay LOWER taxes than middle class due to tax shelters and other business owner loopholes. 

 

The wealthy also get all of their money from the middle class and poor so some progression is 100% appropriate. 

A flat tax rate will result in even more accumulation at the top and hurt the economy. The rich don't spend most of their money. They hoard it. 

So you’re saying the rich don’t invest?  They just earn all their money through big salaries and tuck it away? 

Investment, return on investment, invest more. Typically what creates that return on investment is jobs being performed, goods being made, manufacturing occurring.  Most ‘rich’ with more of their own money to invest, will invest more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Return to 1944-63 income tax rates. 
What are those rates?

Close tax loopholes. 
Which Loopholes are you talking about?

Fully fund the IRS
How much will that cost and what would the ROI be?

Break up monopolies.
Monoplies are illegal  which ones are you talking about?

Get money out of politics. 
What money in politics are you talking about?

Glass-Steagall. Make Banking Boring Again! 
what does making banking boring again even mean?

Increase estate tax. 
What is the estate tax now?  Raise it how much?  Why? 

Some of the richest people in the world pay little to no taxes on their wealth. That should change. 
who are the ones you refer to as some? What is little tax in your mind? Which ones pay no tax? Why should it change? 

A lot of these ideas comes from the fact that we cannot trust that they are holding themselves accountable. So someone has to. 
Who can’t we trust? Define accountable?  Who has to? 

Systematically decrease defense spending. 
How much? Why systematically? 

Increase education spending. Pre-K. Free school breakfast/lunch programs.

who should make it free?  The feds?  The state?  Arent there states that already do this?  

Details would be good huh? 

 

Edited by JimmyBT
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mspart said:

Yes, WA is a blue state.   You could call it a deep blue state where the people are actually moderate.   They lean conservative on some things and liberal on others.  But they vote D.  

So it is weird we don't have an income tax.   But it is nice not having to deal with those state forms.  I lived in MN and HI and hated that rigamarole.  

mspart

You guys vote by mail, right?  And every since that started the Ds have won, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Offthemat said:

You guys vote by mail, right?  And every since that started the Ds have won, right?

Not really.   The Ds won before that but it is easier for the Ds to all of the sudden find ballots that they didn't know about.   That has happened just about every election since.  

Personally I like going to the precinct to vote.   But ont he other hand, we have a state and county sponsored voters guide that presents all the candidates and isues being voted on.   I used to just get the guide and had to figure how which applied to me.   Now I have a ballot and can cut that time in 1/3.   So that is good.   But I think voting in person is much better and safer and more secure.   We do have to sign and those are checked.   Unlike in PA. 

mspart

  • Bob 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Rankings

  • College Commitments

    Jason Kwaak

    Brentwood, New York
    Class of 2025
    Committed to North Carolina State
    Projected Weight: 165

    Liam Hickey

    Cardinal Gibbons, North Carolina
    Class of 2025
    Committed to North Carolina
    Projected Weight: 133

    Tristan Steldt

    Fennimore, Wisconsin
    Class of 2025
    Committed to Pitt
    Projected Weight: 184

    Casen Roark

    Father Ryan, Tennessee
    Class of 2025
    Committed to West Virginia
    Projected Weight: 141

    Will Greenberg

    Hawken, Ohio
    Class of 2025
    Committed to Bucknell
    Projected Weight: 285
×
×
  • Create New...