Dave Loc: Upstate New York

..and, assuming that is true - conservatives use it more, that automatically makes it bad? Obama used social media to raise funds more than Republicans so that too is automatically good?

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

Growth under Reagan was 4.2 a year, so what are right now?
Federal receipts went from 618 billion to 991 billion, that's 60% while outlays grew 54%.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

Wow - you really believe they are just that generous, but they contain their generosity only to the limits of the law?

That is an amazingly naive and trusting mindset - and completely ignores the reality that folks like Buffett got very wealthy by playing both markets and tax advantages better than others.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

Without even going to your reference, doubled with tax cuts prove nothing to you?

They increased every decade, doubled, regardless of tax policy you suggest - and if that's true then tax cuts do not - or tax increases do not - either reduce or increase federal revenues. Guess those darn things are immune from anything going on anywhere else.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

OK, now we can agree - these large corporations benefit immensley from large and complex government - so let's agree that we need to reduce the size and scope of government.

PS. Social Security taxes are to pay for social security benefits - so for all practical purposes these aren't taxes - just forced savings. As to sales tax, last I knew there is no such thing at the federal level.

lone_ghost Loc: Wisconsin

I really wonder how many people posting here have actually taken an economics course. Whole lot of opinion and very little fact. The tax rate as everyone likes to call it is actually a multi-leveled process that includes numerous levies for people over a certain income that say the middle class never have to worry about. Here is a simple fact (do a little research and you find it is true) the 1% every one loves to h**e so much is the beginning of the economic flow. They have the money to start or finance new industries and businesses. These new businesses need a labor force, raw materials, t***sportation to name a few and these all create jobs which puts money into peoples pockets, they in turn spend that money into the economy through consumption. This in turn creates a product deficit that stimulates manufacturing, which creates more jobs. Taking the money from that 1% to support less fortunate people (share the wealth) only serves to make them stop spending money to create new industry, effectively choking of the source of the economic flow which means lost jobs, people do not have money to spend back into the economy, manufacturing slows due to surplus, and the whole flow grinds to a halt and the economic flow stagnates, until it eventually collapses. This is not my opinion, it is the basic principles of economics.
There are always going to be people who have more than other people, that is just a fact of life so rich vs. poor is a man made division that is crippling our economy.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

People don't stop and think. Have you ever worked for a poor person? Money is made not printed like the gov't does, all that does is make that money you have saved worth less.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

I agree with your comments - what the rich provide is capital, and if we take the capital away from them to give to the poor in order to increase their consumption, that is the same as a farmer selling all of his seed instead of holding some back for re-planting.

lone_ghost Loc: Wisconsin

Nice analogy, and accurate.

Geno36 Loc: Texas

Cut taxes and tax reciepts will go up. Opps..cut taxes and revenue goes down..





You got that backward.

Artemis

I agree on almost everything you said except for what poor people want. I don't think they necessarily want what the rich have, like a pair of six hundred dollar shoes, or a bird bath for twelve hundred dollars. I think they would like a nice home to own, one that they can feel proud of,or be able to give their children the things they would like,and be able to afford college,or how about simply being able to fix and maintain your car, maybe even take a vacation. Those simple things are becoming more and more far reaching for more and more Americans.

raydan

What righ people make???!!! Gee, did many of the rich about whom you speak get rich making this stuff people rich and poor alike buy? As someone who started with nothing and busted my butte and took many risk I agree with very little of your thesis. Yes there many who have had the good fortune to inherit wealth and those who are with orginizations that pay them very well.

Many of us in the 1% at times risked everything, as I have< to make it. Why are these abouut whom you rail in that strata of society? Everyone even if given the opportunity wouldn't make even if given a head start.

So do we take from those who are successful at wh**ever level and give it to those who aren't at all succesful or never even tried or even work? I SAY NO!!!!

lone_ghost Loc: Wisconsin

I agree. Most people I know are just looking to reach a level where they do not (need) any more, you know, choosing between buying shoes for your child or paying the electricity bill. I have been there and through the grace of God have reached the point where my family may (want) a lot of things, we very seldom have to make choices like that anymore. I think that is what people want, security, not wealth.

raydan

No they don't! Johnson took SS revenue and put it into th egenera fund and issued govt securities to pay the benefits.

lone_ghost Loc: Wisconsin

I would expect some one from the 1% to be far more articulate than you are unless English is a second language for you. I do however agree with you, I do not believe in the share the wealth philosophy. I feel it undermines the fundamental drive to set and accomplish ones own goals. The people who belong to the 1% should only help those less fortunate if they choose to do so, and many do.