Democratic debate, aka liberal 'news' hosts liberals talking about themselves

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

If like someone to run the numbers on repaying the National debt over a 10 year period where the 1% are charged say...75%, and all the rest of the tax brackets are adjusted to pay a share according to their earnings, just to drive home the point that we can't just rely on taxing the rich back into the black. I want the people who feel like they are lower middle class enough to dodge the communism bullet to see the reality of how much they'll have to contribute to even make a dent. Then I'd drive home the point that since the government has a very long history of NEVER reducing spending, that all those taxes would take hold, and we'd still make no progress toward financial stability.

---

A plan could be put on paper but in reality it can't be done. Not in 10 years, anyway. And the wealthy won't hang around long enough for the gov't to take that much of their money.

John Stossel wrote a pretty good piece for Forbes about this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigma...enough-really/

Lots of jaw dropping comments last night. When asked about her apparent hipocrisy about being one of the "1%", Clinton said she worked really hard and started out poor and wanted everyone to have the opportunities she had. The implication is only she worked hard to become a 1%er and everyone else cheated, stole, bilked their way up. The utter and complete stupidity and lack of simple critical thinking by the dems never fails to shock me.

According to an article from 2011 the top 1% earned a combined AGI of $1.3 trillion with them paying about 37% of their income to taxes which works out to 480 billion in taxes. http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/20/news...street_income/

Lets say you double the income to an insane 75%?? You now have an increase of 480 billion per year.

Debt is roughly 18 trillion??? Its going to take 37 years to pay off the debt.. However we have an approx deficit of 486 billion right now so that would mean we would ALMOST break even.

Again these are 2011 numbers for the AGI.

I watched clips on youtube. What I got out of it was.......I haven't sent the NRA a check in a long time. I need to get on that ASAP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

A plan could be put on paper but in reality it can't be done. Not in 10 years, anyway. And the wealthy won't hang around long enough for the gov't to take that much of their money.

John Stossel wrote a pretty good piece for Forbes about this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigma...enough-really/

---

I know all that, but many people don't realize those things. It'd be like those reports on how long oil will last if everything stays the same until it runs out. I want to know if the numbers would pan out or not in a static report. We all know it wouldn't work out in real life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bryjcom

According to an article from 2011 the top 1% earned a combined AGI of $1.3 trillion with them paying about 37% of their income to taxes which works out to 480 billion in taxes. http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/20/news...street_income/

Lets say you double the income to an insane 75%?? You now have an increase of 480 billion per year.

Debt is roughly 18 trillion??? Its going to take 37 years to pay off the debt.. However we have an approx deficit of 486 billion right now so that would mean we would ALMOST break even.

Again these are 2011 numbers for the AGI.

---

Oh you and your facts. [Beer]

Most Americans want to be part of the FSA, and the FSA wants some other American to pay for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

A plan could be put on paper but in reality it can't be done. Not in 10 years, anyway. And the wealthy won't hang around long enough for the gov't to take that much of their money.

John Stossel wrote a pretty good piece for Forbes about this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigma...enough-really/

---

Capital flight is a serious risk, more so now than ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

A plan could be put on paper but in reality it can't be done. Not in 10 years, anyway. And the wealthy won't hang around long enough for the gov't to take that much of their money.

John Stossel wrote a pretty good piece for Forbes about this: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigma...enough-really/

---

The problem is that the people who have the massive amounts of money can also afford the best lawyers and as such they will most likely never pay their "fair share" (however anyone wants to define that term).

I am trying something new this election cycle and it has made my life much happier...I'm staying completely out of the loop as far as all of this preliminary candidate business. As much as you like candidate X, chances are you aren't even going to have a chance to vote for that candidate because candidate Y has a lot more campaign dollars to spend or candidate Z is back-room dealing like a mofo in order to secure the nomination.

I get very annoyed when people say "Tax the rich more! Pay their fair share!". I get it, they have LOTS of money but I don't know how you can demand someone give up 75% (or whatever number they'd be satisfied using). That's pure insanity. I also don't see any talk about reducing politician's salary to help things out. Nope, only asking the peons to give up more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rucker61

Capital flight is a serious risk, more so now than ever.

---

That would probably be the best outcome, IMHO. The Laffer Curve can also prove educational.

But worse... What do these Dems think will happen when you take the most capable people in the economy and tell them they are going to be slaves? Those people tend to change their behavior, sometimes them pool their resources and do things.

And I'm not just talking the "rich" here. These plans will hurt the middle class more than anyone. If someone told me my net was now 25% I wouldn't work the way I do now.

We all know excess revenue will be redistributed to buy votes anyway. They won't pay down our debt or start funding liabilities. If the political class that intention we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.


ETA: Didn't watch, don't care to. Nothing that was said last night changes my mind about Dems. They are the enemy in every way. Ironically they will damage the people they claim to help more than most care to know.