*sigh* Bill O'Reilly is right

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Gee, what country has the most progressive tax system among developed countries in the world?

taxburden.jpg


But, by all means, tax the "rich" more. And for the record, the next time our president claims he has income he doesn't need, why doesn't he write a check for that amount to the US Treasury?
 
Bottom line, our budget problems don't get solved without attacking entitlements. What's wrong with setting the retirement age for everyone who is 55 and under as five years under the average life expectency? So if it's 74, you work until you're 69, if it's 78, you work until you're 73. The idea we get a paid vacation at the end of our lives is just silly.
 
im not sure what you are trying to say here...that we dont spend alot on defense?

I asked what the response to that chart was. Specifically, how "the US has chosen to put its money into military and spies, and not the needs of its people." The chart shows pretty clearly that we've cut military spending from ~15-20% of GDP to ~5%, and then spent those cuts and much more on other "spending for the people." Whether it's a "need" or not is another discussion.

And (this is a total nitpick, and I don't mean to derail), but DoD spending was cut to 553B for FY2012 budget, and 118B more if you include overseas contingency operations (more than just, but including, Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya). Nowhere close to 928B. Once again, you can cut the entire DoD and still not cover your SS/M/M overruns.
 
gee what country has the highest population of those developed nations? and the worst health care? and middling education stats? and shitloads of homeless? lower third infant mortality rates? lower third life expectancy?

and highest defense budget?

why, the greatest country on earth, thats who!

USA! USA! USA!
 
I think that people don't quite understand what a globally-capable military force does for them.
 
I asked what the response to that chart was. Specifically, how "the US has chosen to put its money into military and spies, and not the needs of its people." The chart shows pretty clearly that we've cut military spending from ~15-20% of GDP to ~5%, and then spent those cuts and much more on other "spending for the people." Whether it's a "need" or not is another discussion.

And (this is a total nitpick, and I don't mean to derail), but DoD spending was cut to 553B for FY2012 budget, and 118B more if you include overseas contingency operations (more than just, but including, Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya). Nowhere close to 928B. Once again, you can cut the entire DoD and still not cover your SS/M/M overruns.

the defense budget has been shrinking, but is still light years ahead of the rest of the world, we bought all the bombs and tanks we needed during the bush money grab, now we can coast on that for a few years
 
gee what country has the highest population of those developed nations?
what does population have to do with tax rates, and whether or not the "rich" are being taxed enough?
and the worst health care?
and middling education stats?
you're blaming poor education on not taxing rich people enough? Don't property taxes get based off of the value of the home, and go towards local education?
and shitloads of homeless? lower third infant mortality rates? lower third life expectancy?
This logic seems to advocate to be like those other countries and drop tax rates on the "rich", so that we'll get down to Swiss and French levels of mortality and homelessness.

And I'm not sure about any other countries than France and Italy on there, but there's a 20% tax on every single thing you buy, which might go a long way towards how they can pay for their social services. Even the poorest homeless guy has to pay 20% when he buys a dollar-menu burger at McDonald's. I'm pretty sure you're not advocating that, though.

"Fuck what the trends are, what the data says and how we're comparing apples to sewer sludge...let's just tax rich people without thinking about it! Oh yeah, and cut defense...that'll solve the problems!"
 
gee what country has the highest population of those developed nations? and the worst health care? and middling education stats? and shitloads of homeless? lower third infant mortality rates? lower third life expectancy?

and highest defense budget?

why, the greatest country on earth, thats who!

USA! USA! USA!

Travel much? Guess not.
 
lol, im not blaming anything on anything, where are you getting this nonsense?

the us has a worse infant mortality rate than cuba.

if you want to make it seem like im arguing with you ...:lol: whatever, i guess you are kinda defensive about defense, appropriate
 
I woudln't say I'm defensive...I'm just not ignorant about it. I am ignorant about other things that I tend to stay away from. I'm not going to spew garbage about QE3's potential impact on financial markets worldwide b/c I really don't have much of a clue. The "defensiveness" you're referencing have been factually-based. I tend to stay away from rhetoric, b/c it doesn't get much done.

What, exactly, are you advocating in bringing up mortality rates in Cuba? Here are some other wiki-facts about Cuba.
On top of rationing, the average wage at the end of 2005 was 334 regular pesos per month ($16.70 per month) and average monthly pension was $9.
A person can get more jail time for killing a cow (10 years in prison) than killing a human. Those who sell beef without government permission can get three to eight years in prison. Eaters of illegal beef can get three months to one year in prison.
Rampant starvation due to food rationing? That's ok...their reported infant mortality rate is less than ours!

Hm...you might be on to something here. Let's abolish taxes and give everyone in the country $25 a month, and see what happens.
 
Rampant starvation due to food rationing? That's ok...their reported infant mortality rate is less than ours!

the US has a lower average life expectancy than cuba too :lol:

good stuff though, i appreciate the factoids
 
I think that people don't quite understand what a globally-capable military force does for them.

can we elaborate on this?

i think having a large military helps corporations make billions by pushing their interests in other countries, thats one thing, thereby making pineapples cheaper, etc.

also, it makes us less likely to be invaded :lol:
 
can I get back to you on that? My lunch break's about over, and not enough time to write anything worth reading.

That said, there are some classics ("Influence of Sea Power on History"), some historical works ("Rise of Theodore Roosevelt" talks about his time as Asst. Sec. of the Navy, and modernization efforts and the reasons for them), "Quadrennial Defense Review" (put out by the President) and its associated Naval Review, "Sea Power 2010", the first half of "The Next 100 Years", some of the Adelphi Papers. Milan Vego is a professor at the War College and writes encyclopedias about this stuff, but especially in the Maritime Trade Protection realm.

Most of the stuff I'm giving you is Navy-centric, b/c I think that's the easiest to grasp and the most far-reaching.

To your last point, the last time we were invaded (and our capital city burned to the ground) was a direct result of only having a protectionist, isolationist Navy and no standing army to speak of.
 
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America ’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America ’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006
 
But, by all means, tax the "rich" more. And for the record, the next time our president claims he has income he doesn't need, why doesn't he write a check for that amount to the US Treasury?

Because he's got a birthday party to throw for himself! :)

Ed O.
 
So do a decided majority of Americans. Polls have consistently favored raising taxes on the rich (or just letting the "Bush" tax cuts expire)/returning the income tax levels to where they'd been, closing tax loopholes, AND cutting spending. But our government officials on both sides of the aisle are bought and paid for by the same rich people, so understandably thats been off the table. So has cutting military spending.

:google: are americans for raising taxes to pay off the deficit?

:google: are americans for cutting military spending?

STOMP

Surprising. A majority of Americans are in favor of increasing taxes on people that make more than themselves? I'm shocked!
 
Surprising. A majority of Americans are in favor of increasing taxes on people that make more than themselves? I'm shocked!

yes surprisingly, people tend to be in favor of things that benefit them :lol:

you should write an entire article about this! then tackle the intense discussion behind "kids are in favor of free ice cream"
 
I'm fortunate enough to be fairly wealthy (not gonna mention numbers, but I'm over the 250k/year thing), and I really don't mind paying more in taxes at all. I'm probably the only wealthy person in the world who will say that :) But I know how hard it is for many families to survive on a very limited income. I've been there. I have many friends who've been there and/or are still there. Hell I grew up in that kind of environment...there was no silver spoon in my mouth growing up.

There are TONS of excellent, excellent people who work hard every day (many harder than myself I'm sure), yet can barely support their kids. And yet here I am, after a series of fortunate events, sitting comfortably. How is that fair? I just as easily could be in their shoes too if things hadn't gone my way.

Anyway, I don't want to write an essay, but I really feel wealthy people who habitually whine about taxes are simply greedy. You don't need a 8000 square foot home, 5 hot sports cars, a yacht, a private jet, or whatever else. How about lending some extra support to the country that enabled you to live such a wonderful life to begin with???
 
I'm fortunate enough to be fairly wealthy (not gonna mention numbers, but I'm over the 250k/year thing), and I really don't mind paying more in taxes at all. I'm probably the only wealthy person in the world who will say that :) But I know how hard it is for many families to survive on a very limited income. I've been there. I have many friends who've been there and/or are still there. Hell I grew up in that kind of environment...there was no silver spoon in my mouth growing up.

There are TONS of excellent, excellent people who work hard every day (many harder than myself I'm sure), yet can barely support their kids. And yet here I am, after a series of fortunate events, sitting comfortably. How is that fair? I just as easily could be in their shoes too if things hadn't gone my way.

Anyway, I don't want to write an essay, but I really feel wealthy people who habitually whine about taxes are simply greedy. You don't need a 8000 square foot home, 5 hot sports cars, a yacht, a private jet, or whatever else. How about lending some extra support to the country that enabled you to live such a wonderful life to begin with???

The US Treasury accepts Money Orders, Checks, VISA, MasterCard and American Express. They look forward to your unsolicited donation.

I'm not in the least bit guilty about what I make. And I prefer to direct money I choose to give to charities who use the money more wisely than the Federal Government.
 
The US Treasury accepts Money Orders, Checks, VISA, MasterCard and American Express. They look forward to your unsolicited donation.

I'm not in the least bit guilty about what I make. And I prefer to direct money I choose to give to charities who use the money more wisely than the Federal Government.

Maybe if everyone was like you, we wouldn't need to raise taxes. But the reality is most do not give to the gov't or to charities. Most want to hoard their riches and not give any (if they had their way) to the country that gave them the opportunity to make all that money.
 
Maybe if everyone was like you, we wouldn't need to raise taxes. But the reality is most do not give to the gov't or to charities. Most want to hoard their riches and not give any (if they had their way) to the country that gave them the opportunity to make all that money.

Oh, no, you have it wrong. I'm the greedy bastard; TehChad is the altruistic one because he wants all of us to give our money to the government.

The reason we are being asked to pay more taxes is that the previous Administration preached fiscal conservatism while spending like drunken sailors, and the current Administration made the previous one look like misers. Jesus, we've increased non-discretionary spending by 24% in the past 30 months. What the fuck? Get the damn spending under control first.
 
Oh, no, you have it wrong. I'm the greedy bastard; TehChad is the altruistic one because he wants all of us to give our money to the government.

The reason we are being asked to pay more taxes is that the previous Administration preached fiscal conservatism while spending like drunken sailors, and the current Administration made the previous one look like misers. Jesus, we've increased non-discretionary spending by 24% in the past 30 months. What the fuck? Get the damn spending under control first.

I don't disagree with that concept. It's complicated and not saying I agree they are out of control, but agree gov't is spending a lot of cash.

My point is if increasing taxes is the answer, I think it makes more sense to tax the "wealthy" (again) than this idea of a national sales tax.
 
And for the record, the next time our president claims he has income he doesn't need, why doesn't he write a check for that amount to the US Treasury?

That has to be the most fucking retarded argument in the history of retarded arguments. You sound two years old when you make statements like that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top