If buffet wanted his secretary to pay the same income taxes as he does...

kelly4

Well-Known Member
FYI: most new jobs are created by small businesses, not the rich.
I know. I didn't say cut taxes on super rich, did I? I said on businesses! And the part about no demand......NO SHIT! If your'e selling a product there is no demand for, you are an IDIOT! Show you an article? It's taught in college-It's called economics!
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
I agree with Kelly4....... her points are correct. Demands for goods rise as people have more money to spend on goods and have a positive attitude towards the future.

And jobs are NOT being created because of the uncertainty in this administration and their policies- not because of the tax situation.
 

massah

Well-Known Member
I am not sure how the legal tax code created by politicians is somehow unfair and it is the rich's fault when the capital gains tax applies to everyone in America.
1) The tax code is heavily lobbied to be formulated to give corporations and rich people the shit they want...we already know this...
2) The capital gains tax WAS higher before 2003...thank you GW Bushfaggot...
3) Long term capital gains taxes of 15% are only available to people who can afford to tie up money in assets for over a year...regardless of if it "applies" to all Americans, it sure as hell isn't reasonably available to 95% of Americans...
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
1)
2) The capital gains tax WAS higher before 2003...thank you GW Bushfaggot...
Are you mad that he lowered a tax? A lowering of a tax is always a good thing! If we raised everyones taxes to 50%, the rich would still be rich. The poor would STILL be poor. Any raising of taxes is bad and unecessary.
 

mame

Well-Known Member
Correct. When taxes go up jobs are cut. Cutting taxes on businesses creates jobs. Not only do workers pay income taxes, but they pay sales taxes. When they buy stuff, the places they buy from pay taxes. More people shopping there means more people working there=more taxes. The more people working=The more taxes brought in. LOWERING taxes creates jobs and wealth. Yes trickle down WORKS! I don't care how many breaks the rich get as long as I am better off in the long run!
lol really?

Taxes going up DOES NOT always mean job losses because of the natural friction involved in cutting a workforce. Tax increases on a business will chip away at profitability, sure, and then a business may respond by attempting to cut costs. But that cost cutting is more likely to effect wages, and the price of goods or services being offered rather than be a detriment to hiring because businesses already try to have as few workers as necessary for the work load. If you cut jobs too much, and there aren't enough workers to keep up with demand than the company is more likely to become less profitable in the long run - which becomes counterproductive. I work in the lighting industry, and we've been hit with some major price increases in both shipping and in the cost of our product. We've raised prices on our goods and we've absorbed some of the cost but no one was fired; In fact, the company I work for is still looking to expand because the workload has been increasing due to increased demand for our products. Increased taxation causes a business to make the same decisions as increased products costs.

Also, lowering taxes does not always create jobs and wealth; It depends on what KIND of taxes are cut. If you cut estate taxes, or capital gains taxes - you aren't really creating jobs. If you cut payroll taxes, than you're effecting aggregate demand which DOES create jobs. "Trickle down" does NOT work because you're talking about inneffective supply side tax cuts. Hint: the multiplier on the Bush tax cuts is much lower than the multiplier on the payroll tax cut.

And you should care about how many breaks the rich get if you care about the deficit. In 2000, Federal revenue amounted to ~20% of GDP. in 2010, federal revenue was around 15% (and even once the output gap is closed it's set to be ~17% of GDP). Within that time frame, Corporate taxes as a share of GDP have fallen 40%. The rich aren't paying their fair share and they need to pay more; The alternative is that we balance the budget by slashing programs that the middle and lower class of the US (read: most people) rely on.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
I'm conservative, thats why I too hate GW Bush. A dumbass with an itchy spending finger. But, on this point he was right on. Lowering taxes is a GOOD thing!
 

massah

Well-Known Member
Are you mad that he lowered a tax? A lowering of a tax is always a good thing! If we raised everyones taxes to 50%, the rich would still be rich. The poor would STILL be poor. Any raising of taxes is bad and unecessary.
I'm not mad that he lowered a tax rate...but he lowered a tax rate used by the uberrich only so they could abuse it more...where do you think the majority of "rich" people put their money now? Long term investments that give them a lower tax bracket so they can be even more rich...its not fucking rocket science here folks...its simple...

Now YES I agree taxes for BUSINESSES should be cut, but I'm talking about the PERSONAL wealth taxes that only the rich get to take advantage of, so they can get even richer, even faster due to the lowered tax burden...
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
lol really?

Taxes going up DOES NOT always mean job losses because of the natural friction involved in cutting a workforce. Tax increases on a business will chip away at profitability, sure, and then a business may respond by attempting to cut costs. But that cost cutting is more likely to effect wages, and the price of goods or services being offered rather than be a detriment to hiring because businesses already try to have as few workers as necessary for the work load. If you cut jobs too much, and there aren't enough workers to keep up with demand than the company is more likely to become less profitable in the long run - which becomes counterproductive. I work in the lighting industry, and we've been hit with some major price increases in both shipping and in the cost of our product. We've raised prices on our goods and we've absorbed some of the cost but no one was fired; In fact, the company I work for is still looking to expand because the workload has been increasing due to increased demand for our products. Increased taxation causes a business to make the same decisions as increased products costs.

Also, lowering taxes does not always create jobs and wealth; It depends on what KIND of taxes are cut. If you cut estate taxes, or capital gains taxes - you aren't really creating jobs. If you cut payroll taxes, than you're effecting aggregate demand which DOES create jobs. "Trickle down" does NOT work because you're talking about inneffective supply side tax cuts. Hint: the multiplier on the Bush tax cuts is much lower than the multiplier on the payroll tax cut.

And you should care about how many breaks the rich get if you care about the deficit. In 2000, Federal revenue amounted to ~20% of GDP. in 2010, federal revenue was around 15% (and even once the output gap is closed it's set to be ~17% of GDP). Within that time frame, Corporate taxes as a share of GDP have fallen 40%. The rich aren't paying their fair share and they need to pay more; The alternative is that we balance the budget by slashing programs that the middle and lower class of the US (read: most people) rely on.
I am talking on a macro level not a micro level. Yes every business is different. I said trickle down works. It also works the other way. Everybody doesn't lose their job at once. 1 here, 1 there turns into 100's into 100,000's. Without them workers money getting spread around, more cuts are needed. Now taxes are down so they want to raise taxes. The circle is going in the wrong direction! Your'e alternative of slashing wouldn't be needed if the government were to free things up. But, without their regulations and taxation they wouldn't have as much control over us!
 

Ringsixty

Well-Known Member
He could simply pay her in stock...


Problem solved eh?


How does such a smart guy manage to be so dumb?

I agree...that cheap bastard could pay her at least 7 digit figure.
You guys do know that she makes around 200k a year and they haven't even uncovered how much stock she owns or what she pays on that...which is 15% cap gain.
They are only looking @ the taxes she pays on salary.

Come on guy...who is blowing smoke up who's ASS??????

Buffet has been talking a lot of shit these days. I guess because he is bored of making money and is getting close to the end of his life span. He just wants to leave his own scar on the political theater.

Remember one thing gang.
Buffet is a true capitalist and it is all about the money.

How soon we forget about the big stock purchase of BOA after a call to the Pres.
OMG man...he made like 500 million the next day.

He so full on shit... and the public is so blind....!

You all getting played.

SHEEP
 

mame

Well-Known Member
I am talking on a macro level not a micro level. Yes every business is different. I said trickle down works. It also works the other way. Everybody doesn't lose their job at once. 1 here, 1 there turns into 100's into 100,000's. Without them workers money getting spread around, more cuts are needed. Now taxes are down so they want to raise taxes. The circle is going in the wrong direction! Your'e alternative of slashing wouldn't be needed if the government were to free things up. But, without their regulations and taxation they wouldn't have as much control over us!
I'm talking on a Macro level as well; Taxes dont effect business decisions as much as you think they do. Nor do regulations. In fact, regulation has very little effect on our current economic situation: Businesses are very profitable right now, and have tons of cash on hand. Demand, however, remains very low - and that is the problem - not regulation. Hell, even businesses are reporting that in private surveys:



demand, demand, demand. It's simple.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
I'm talking on a Macro level as well; Taxes dont effect business decisions as much as you think they do. Nor do regulations. In fact, regulation has very little effect on our current economic situation: Businesses are very profitable right now, and have tons of cash on hand. Demand, however, remains very low - and that is the problem - not regulation. Hell, even businesses are reporting that in private surveys:



demand, demand, demand. It's simple.
There is no demand because of the UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. Not only are there less people with money, people will not spend when they are afraid.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
Also, depending on who is doing the study, you can have a chart that says anything you want it to. I'm not saying it's wrong. What i'm saying is give companies tax incentives to hire more people. Companies(everybody really) has to realise that if jobs are not created and unemployment is not improved, demand will keep going down.
 

mame

Well-Known Member
demand, demand, demand. It's simple.

here's another one, from the WSJ:
[U.S. companies are reluctant to hire—but not because of uncertainty over government policies, as Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke mentioned in his testimony before Congress last week. A majority of the 53 economists surveyed from July 8-13 by the Wall Street Journal say it is the lack of demand that is keeping hiring down.
And by Majority they mean 80%. So 4 out of every 5 economists surveyed (wow this is WSJ too lol...) disagrees with you.
 

Ringsixty

Well-Known Member
Also, depending on who is doing the study, you can have a chart that says anything you want it to.
Yep..you can fudge any chart.
Example: The scientist who fudge the Global warming charts...Classic.
"How embarrassing they got caught" Shame, shame
 

massah

Well-Known Member
yup...demand drives business...simple as that...greed drives the stock market and fat ass rich folks capital gains :D
 

mame

Well-Known Member
Listen, it's not just the surveys; I made two very important points in an earlier post: Businesses have plenty of cash, and are very profitable ATM. If you were right - that taxation and regulation were to blame for our economic problems - than profitability wouldn't be so high. Businesses aren't hiring because they dont have enough demand for their products and lowering their taxes wont change that, it'll just further increase profitability which doesn't change anything (because DEMAND spurs investment).
 
Top