Dave Ramsey on Debt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

[sarcasm]What a great incentive to make people work and invest.[/sarcasm]

That's probably one of the most idiotic things I've ever seen posted here.

---

Really, so why should workers be punished more. Infact, if you tax dividend income more, it incentives investors to make longterm investments rather than short term. I rather like the idea of people working towards a long term healthy America rather than slitting our throats for 1 quarters earnings.

Now for investment income, no taxes would be paid on the initial investment amount. Losses of initial investment amounts could be written off on other profits. There should also be an inflation index added to keep the value of the original investment from being taxes.

As to why you think its better to tax workers more than the investor class, well you need to explain that more than with just an insult.

why are we still talking about taxes? taxes shouldn't even be a debate until the government has learned to live within their means, and they are light years from that point.

How simply does it have to be said before liberals can understand? From FoxNews:

David Beers, global head of sovereign and international public finance ratings at S&P, told "Fox News Sunday" that governments and Congresses come and go, but spending on entitlements persistently drags U.S. debt further into the red.

"The key thing is, yes, entitlement reform is important because entitlements are the biggest component of spending, and the part of spending where the cost pressures are greatest," Beers said.

The rich DID NOT get us into this financial mess. The rich pay their fair share of taxes. Reckless fiscal policy and spending more money than we have by politicians got us into this mess. Now they're looking for a scapegoat and they've settled on the "rich" because, for the most part, politicians are a bunch of chickenshit cowards. And democrats don't want to reform entitlement/welfare programs because they'll piss off their base.

50% of our society that effectively pays zero taxes is part of the problem. We simply can't afford to support these deadbeats any longer. That does not include the small minority who truly need help.

This is not an issue that can be solved with bumper-sticker slogans like "make the rich pay their share". It's a typical liberal strategy designed not to solve the problem but to pander to the (mostly) uneducated and unmotivated masses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nynco

As to why you think its better to tax workers more than the investor class, well you need to explain that more than with just an insult.

---

I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.

So all you got are insults. Predictable...

So the rich paying their fair share means that as you get richer, you should pay LESS of a taxrate than the middle class? This is what you are saying.

As to the S&P stuff, you left something really important out.

“We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”

It’s right there on Page 4 of the official Standard & Poors “Research Update” – the actual report on what they did and why – published on August 5th as the explanation for why they believe Congress – and even the Gang of Twelve – will be unable to actually deal with the US debt crisis.

Apparently you have difficulty discerning insults from truth.

And yes...I left a lot of important stuff out. I suppose I could've cut/pasted the entire report here. I was trying to be brief. That's sort of the point of using an excerpt.

And I told you what the problem is. It's not a matter of anyone paying more taxes. It's a matter of those not paying, paying their share. But more than that it's a matter of our government not spending money we don't have.

I gave you an answer. You just don't like the answer thus you fall back to the only thing you have. Attacking the messenger.

You are a typical liberal.

(Yes...that is an insult)

Well if you would could comprehend what I was writing you might get past your hate for all things liberal.

If there is a flat tax on all forms of income, the poor will pay too. But you can't seem to get that obvious fact.

No, I do get it. I'm not against a flat tax. I would prefer a national sales tax as the collection sources/procedures are already in place.

But that's not the point. The point is:

• The government perpetually spends more money than it takes in.
• The biggest reason for that is entitlement spending.

It really is that simple.

Oh...

Don't hold your breath waiting for me to get past my hatred for liberal ideals.

Actually no, one of the biggest reasons is the military. Soc Sec and medicaid are paid for by specific taxes and not payed for from the general fund.

So since you are all for lowering taxes to the small gov levels of the 1800's does that mean that you are for abolishing our standing military and returning to what the founders envisioned? You do know the founders put into the constitution that the militarys' existence must be voted on every 2 years.