|
|
On November 13 2012 07:44 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:43 oneofthem wrote:
because they don't want to pay taxes, i.e. to support the very society that enables their business operations. then how is the answer to raise taxes, effectively making it even more unattractive to keep their money here? inb4 someone says we should force them to keep their money here. (Soviet Union ftw!)
K so you're saying we should all become tax heavens, as apparently we have to compete to keep their money sitting a bank somewhere.
|
so instead of providing incentive's to keep their money here, we should just punish them for keeping it elsewhere ?
and this isn't about punishing the rich?
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic.
So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic.
On November 13 2012 07:50 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so instead of providing incentive's to keep their money here, we should just punish them for keeping it elsewhere ?
and this isn't about punishing the rich?
It's about punishing tax evaders. Stop lumping all rich people in the same category. We're certainly not doing that.
|
On November 13 2012 07:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 06:38 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 13 2012 06:17 DeepElemBlues wrote:On November 13 2012 06:12 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 13 2012 06:08 DeepElemBlues wrote:On November 13 2012 06:02 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 13 2012 05:58 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On November 13 2012 05:18 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 13 2012 05:07 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On November 13 2012 03:31 NicolBolas wrote:
[quote]
He didn't say that. He said that Obama should be willing to go the fiscal cliff route if the Republicans aren't willing to make meaningful compromises. That is, he's saying that we shouldn't let them hold the country hostage and give in to everything they want. He's using strange and contradictory logic. Reps are bad for their brinkmanship and so Obama and the Dems should counter with brinkmanship of their own. Reps are bad for not compromising but Dems should go "not far at all" in meeting Rep demands. Reps are holding the economy hostage by not striking a deal yet the "fiscal cliff isn’t really a cliff" and that going over it isn't an immediate worry. To me it often sounds like he's advocating scorched-earth politics - kill the other guy even if it hurts the common good: More important, however, is the point that a stalemate would hurt Republican backers, corporate donors in particular, every bit as much as it hurt the rest of the country. Really? It is more important to hurt Republican backers than help the rest of the country? Well, if the Republican backers continue to push for things like the Bush tax cuts (which were disastrous for the country's long term health), then yes. It may make more sense to hurt Republican backers even if it dampens the overall economic outlook for a few years, especially since the Republican backers will lobby like hell for that not to happen anyway. I'm not sure I agree with his assessment regarding the fiscal cliff, but it's not contradictory with his overall views that Republicans holding the primary power over national economic policy is going to be awful for the economy. By what measures are you judging the Bush tax cuts to be 'disastrous'? Also, are you referring to all the Bush tax cuts or just the portions Dems don't like? As in, they caused tepid-at-best economic growth and crushingly expanded the deficit (they were pitched as government revenue-neutral). The composite cuts should really be repealed, and it's a measure of how obnoxious the "middle-class" rhetoric is that they became the "baseline" in Washington for anybody at all. I mean, by what metric were they "successful?" I don't think you know what tepid means... also, I don't think you know what "long-term" means. Look at GDP growth from 2000-2003 and then from 2003-2008, I think that might be a metric you want to look at. Also, the unemployment rate. That might be another metric. It is a mystery of mental gymnastics as to how record tax revenues crushingly expanded the deficit. It might be understandable if tax cuts lowered tax revenue, but when revenue came in at larger levels after the cuts than before, there might just be another explanation for higher deficits, one that you seem to have almost unbelievably failed to mention... Well, for one thing, tax revenues didn't regain their 2000 peak until 2006. As of 2008, total federal tax revenue/GDP wasn't at its 2000 peak. And the "long term" is more in the generational accounting level of government than anything. http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=2000_2008&view=1&expand&units=b&fy=fy11&chart=F0-fed&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&title&state=US&color=c&local=s Well, first of all, "Total direct revenue" is not the same as federal tax revenues. Here's a chart of that, which does indeed only surpass 2000 in 2006 (it almost is equal in 2005). http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/revenue_chart_1990_2010USb_13s1li011mcn_10f_Federal_Revenue_By_TypeSecond of all, there's no indication that the Bush tax cuts resulted in a markedly better economy than would have occurred without them. If you look at the % change in GDP from 1970-2010, the changes during Bush's first term and the first half of his second term are nothing exceptional. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growthI ask again: by what metric were the tax cuts successful? It's not relative GDP growth. It's not jobs growth. They didn't shrink government. Edit: I mean, I suppose by the metric of "lowering taxes" they were successful. Edit2: "Putting money in people's pockets" is another way they were successful. I don't think either of those are compelling reasons to make (or preserve) fiscal policy, however, just like I don't think the fact that Social Security puts more money into people's pockets than if we reformed it means we shouldn't reform social security. Lowering taxes was largely the point of the Bush tax cuts. Its how the country wanted to spend the surplus. In '03 the tax cuts were accelerated (put in place quicker) to act as a stimulus. Its hard to say if the Bush tax cuts did any good since we don't know what economic growth would have been without them. Comparing the '00's to previous decades is a bit unfair given different economic circumstances (war, rising commodity prices). Though I won't argue that they didn't work as well as intended. For the most part Dems like the Bush tax cuts just as much as the Reps. The Dems just don't like the tax cuts for the rich portions. But I think they're only partially right about that - the low tax rates on cap gains haven't hurt the government's budget ( source) and so I see no reason to raise those rates.
It's how people wanted to spend the surplus, yes. But I'm not sure that means we should continue them full blast at a time when we don't have a surplus anymore. If the initial premises had been true-if they had worked out as intended and we'd had record growth/abnormal growth-then preserving them would make sense.
It just seems silly to me that the tax cuts which were temporary provisions based on a surplus (admittedly because of fearing the Byrd Rule) are assumed to be the status quo for government going forward, and on BOTH sides. I dunno, I should delve into it more beyond the more hyperbolic Generational Crisis stuff I've read I suppose.
|
On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic.
it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense.
holy crap you just admitted it was about punishing the rich. making a perfectly legal and reasonable behavior illegal because of a perceived wrong...
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 13 2012 07:50 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so instead of providing incentive's to keep their money here, we should just punish them for keeping it elsewhere ?
and this isn't about punishing the rich?
it's about carrying out the power of government. a law enforcement matter.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense.
Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics.
|
On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. holy crap you just admitted it was about punishing the rich. making a perfectly legal and reasonable behavior illegal because of a perceived wrong...
Now, that is a specious argument...
|
On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics.
how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted?
|
On November 13 2012 07:53 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:50 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so instead of providing incentive's to keep their money here, we should just punish them for keeping it elsewhere ?
and this isn't about punishing the rich? it's about carrying out the power of government. a law enforcement matter.
it is not currently illegal to put your money in an off-shore account.
and I thought the point was to spur the economy? now it's about law enforcement of something that isn't against the law?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
yea the tax code should be changed. we are talking about the perverse incentive to flow money into shadow banking after that change.
|
On November 13 2012 07:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:53 oneofthem wrote:On November 13 2012 07:50 sc2superfan101 wrote:
so instead of providing incentive's to keep their money here, we should just punish them for keeping it elsewhere ?
and this isn't about punishing the rich? it's about carrying out the power of government. a law enforcement matter. it is not currently illegal to put your money in an off-shore account. and I thought the point was to spur the economy? now it's about law enforcement of something that isn't against the law?
What the shit...?
If there's law enforcement against something, then it IS against the law. Laws change, you know.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted?
'wasted'
Give me a break. Is there anything you want to contribute to this conversation that has more than two hues? If not then I will gladly step back because this is not something I wish to argue over with someone who mistakes the sky for a rock.
|
On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted?
How are you so good at doing mental gymnastics?
|
On November 13 2012 08:00 oneofthem wrote:
yea the tax code should be changed. we are talking about the perverse incentive to flow money into shadow banking after that change.
it should be changed to punish the rich for putting their money in off-shore accounts, no?
|
On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted?
People who put their money in offshore accounts are doing so to increase their net worth. They are not doing so to keep their money from being wasted; they are doing it to prevent their money from being used at all, by anyone, for anything. This is a selfish drive (well, I suppose it is technically beneficial to their progeny).
If they wanted to prevent it from being wasted by an inefficient government they would presumably donate a similar quantity to a charity, which nets them tax benefits right now. But not all of them do because they would rather have more money.
|
On November 13 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted? 'wasted' Give me a break. Is there anything you want to contribute to this conversation that has more than two hues? If not then I will gladly step back because this is not something I wish to argue over with someone who mistakes the sky for a rock.
I'm thinking shades of grey here. the perception among these people is obviously that putting their money here will lead to a net loss for them, or they wouldn't put their money somewhere else.
obviously their perception is that it is being wasted, so why is it unpatriotic to not want your money to be wasted?
|
On November 13 2012 08:04 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted? 'wasted' Give me a break. Is there anything you want to contribute to this conversation that has more than two hues? If not then I will gladly step back because this is not something I wish to argue over with someone who mistakes the sky for a rock. I'm thinking shades of grey here. the perception among these people is obviously that putting their money here will lead to a net loss for them, or they wouldn't put their money somewhere else. obviously their perception is that it is being wasted, so why is it unpatriotic to not want your money to be wasted?
Just because they perceive that putting the money here is a net loss for them in no way guarantees that they perceive their money as being wasted. I don't see how that follows.
Indeed, I perceive that having my money in the United States instead of an off-shore account is a net loss for me; that does not mean I think my money is being wasted.
|
On November 13 2012 08:06 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 08:04 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted? 'wasted' Give me a break. Is there anything you want to contribute to this conversation that has more than two hues? If not then I will gladly step back because this is not something I wish to argue over with someone who mistakes the sky for a rock. I'm thinking shades of grey here. the perception among these people is obviously that putting their money here will lead to a net loss for them, or they wouldn't put their money somewhere else. obviously their perception is that it is being wasted, so why is it unpatriotic to not want your money to be wasted? Just because they perceive that putting the money here is a net loss for them in no way guarantees that they perceive their money as being wasted. I don't see how that follows. Indeed, I perceive that having my money in the United States instead of an off-shore account is a net loss for me; that does not mean I think my money is being wasted.
well obviously they feel as though the net-loss is not balanced by any gain, and therefore would be wasted.
if they thought it was worth it, they would put their money here. things that aren't worth the cost are usually defined as "waste"
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 13 2012 08:04 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:58 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:55 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:53 sc2superfan101 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:51 Souma wrote:On November 13 2012 07:42 sc2superfan101 wrote:
not to mention that there is a very real reason why people put their money in offshore accounts and not here, and contrary to popular belief, it isn't because they are greedy and unpatriotic. So... dodging taxes is not greedy and unpatriotic? What? I mean, it's perfectly fine for you to say, "Well, I don't think it should be okay for the rich to be paying so much in taxes." It's another thing to say that tax evasion is not greedy and unpatriotic. it is not tax evasion to put your money in an off-shore account, as it is not currently illegal to do so. it's common sense. Whether it's common sense or not does not make it any less greedy or unpatriotic lol. I'm not going to argue over semantics. how is it greedy and unpatriotic to want to keep your money from being wasted? 'wasted' Give me a break. Is there anything you want to contribute to this conversation that has more than two hues? If not then I will gladly step back because this is not something I wish to argue over with someone who mistakes the sky for a rock. I'm thinking shades of grey here. the perception among these people is obviously that putting their money here will lead to a net loss for them, or they wouldn't put their money somewhere else. obviously their perception is that it is being wasted, so why is it unpatriotic to not want your money to be wasted?
Listen to yourself. It's a net loss for them so they won't do it - that's EXACTLY what greedy is, and in turn it's unpatriotic because you screw over many Americans because of it.
If I refuse to give you my cupcake because it would be a net loss for me, that's me being selfish!
Argue that it is not fair for them to pay more taxes. Argue that tax hikes will not be better for the economy. But don't you dare say not paying taxes is anything less than greedy and unpatriotic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
