Tax the Rich!

[Gipper]

The Great Walter Williams explains why taxing corporations hurts workers.

Don't be ignorant by buying the lies promoted by the Left.

Ignorance Exploited

Many Wall Street occupiers are echoing the Communist Party USA's call to "Save the nation! Tax corporations! Tax the rich!" There are other Americans, on both the left and the right -- for example, President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner -- who call for reductions in corporate taxes. But the University of California, Berkeley's pretend economist Robert Reich disagrees, saying, "The economy needs two whopping corporate tax cuts right now as much as someone with a serious heart condition needs Botox." Let's look at corporate taxes and ask, "Who pays them?"

Tax policies that raise the cost of capital formation -- such as capital gains taxes, low depreciation allowances and corporate taxes -- reduce capital formation. As a result, workers have less capital, lower productivity and lower wage growth. In 1980, Joseph Stiglitz, now a Nobel laureate, said that workers share the highest corporate tax burden in the form of lower wages. A number of economic studies, including that of the Congressional Budget Office, show that workers bear anywhere from 45 to 75 percent of the corporate tax burden. Adding to the burden is the fact that capital has the kind of mobility that labor doesn't. Corporate capital can flee to other countries easily, but workers cannot.

Politicians and leftist elite get away with corporate tax demagoguery because economists haven't done well in making our subject understandable to ordinary people, not to mention that we have derelict news media people with little understanding.
http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2011/11/09/ignorance_exploited

 

[Dr.Who]

The Great Walter Williams explains why taxing corporations hurts workers.

Tax policies that raise the cost of capital formation -- such as capital gains taxes, low depreciation allowances and corporate taxes -- reduce capital formation. As a result, workers have less capital, lower productivity and lower wage growth. In 1980, Joseph Stiglitz, now a Nobel laureate, said that workers share the highest corporate tax burden in the form of lower wages.

Don't be ignorant by buying the lies promoted by the Left.

That is so true.

In fact every time someone monkeys with the system it hurts how the system operates and of course those who feel it hardest are the poor.

Minimum wage laws decrease wages over all.
Rent control increases rent
Regulation makes industry produce less at higher costs.
etc

Consider in my town the new laws that while they don't ban the burning of leaves make it impossible to do so. Previously we all burned our leaves on whatever day made the most sense for our household. Over the course of a whole fall one person might burn his leaves on a Friday early in November and another might have burned them on a Saturday late in November. We each picked a day that was efficient for us.

Now we can put our leaves at the curb to be picked up by the city. We can only do it on one particular day of October and one particular day in November. If you happen to be on vacation or just to busy to get them out there on that day - well tough luck. The inefficiency of needing to meet someone else's deadline is felt by all. Not to mention that now there are whole crews of workers with very unique and expensive machines that must now be paid to go around and suck up all those leaves. They are paid through an inefficient tax system which just might include some graft or cronyism. And somewhere someone is reselling the leaf mulch at a profit making this whole thing a process designed to move money from my pocket to someone else's and sold to me as a benefit to me that I have no choice to pay for or not. Anytime someone sells you something but forces you to pay for it you have to suspect that it is not really worth the price or they would not need to force you to buy it.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Remember way back when the idea was, you paid in proportion to what you got? That was the basic premise that made money worth something.

They pay most of the taxes because they have most of the money.

A famous bank robber was once asked why he kept robbing banks. He replied, "Because that's where the money is!"

The differences between that bank robber and today's modern liberals?

(a) The robber acknowledged that what he was doing was theft.
(b) The robber didn't try to pretend that what he was doing would benefit anyone besides himself.
(c) The robber didn't keep trying to push laws that would make his activities legal.

Aside from these three things, there is NO difference between that robber and today's modern liberals.

 

[DogPants]

Don't forget that the bank robber does not have the tacit consent of the community, while the legal tax collecting institution does.

 

[Gipper]

The Great Walter Williams does it again. Here is an excellent explanation that is really common sense, but sadly many of us lack...sense. I mean really...I knew this when I was 12 years old.

Why do many on the left not know this?

Class warfare thrives on ignorance about the sources of income. Listening to some of the talk about income differences, one would think that there's a pile of money meant to be shared equally among Americans. Rich people got to the pile first and greedily took an unfair share. Justice requires that they "give back." Or, some people talk about unequal income distribution as if there were a dealer of dollars. The reason some people have millions or billions of dollars while others have very few is the dollar dealer is a racist, sexist, a multinationalist or just plain mean. Economic justice requires a re-dealing of the dollars, income redistribution or spreading the wealth, where the ill-gotten gains of the few are returned to their rightful owners.

Stubborn ignorance sees capitalism as benefiting only the rich, but the evidence refutes that. The rich have always been able to afford entertainment; it was the development and marketing of radio and television that made entertainment accessible to the common man. The rich have never had the drudgery of washing and ironing clothing, beating out carpets or waxing floors. The mass production of washing machines, wash-and-wear clothing, vacuum cleaners and no-wax floors spared the common man this drudgery. At one time, only the rich could afford automobiles, telephones and computers. Now all but a small percentage of Americans enjoy these goods.

The prospects are dim for a society that makes mascots out of the unproductive and condemns the productive.
http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2011/11/23/should_the_rich_be_condemned

 

[Openmind]

The Great Walter Williams does it again. Here is an excellent explanation that is really common sense, but sadly many of us lack...sense. I mean really...I knew this when I was 12 years old.

Why do many on the left not know this?

Why don't you invest in your education and rent/buy the movie "INSIDE JOB."

Then, you may be able to understand something. . .and for $4 to $6.00 investment. . it's worth it!

 

[Gipper]

Why don't you invest in your education and rent/buy the movie "INSIDE JOB."

Then, you may be able to understand something. . .and for $4 to $6.00 investment. . it's worth it!

Sorry, but I have no interest in watching leftist propaganda. Though I suspect some of it is likely accurate.

I can agree that Wall Street and the banks did many things they should not have, but unlike you, I know the much bigger culprit for our economic crisis is the federal government...did that burst your class warfare bubble?

 

[Openmind]

Sorry, but I have no interest in watching leftist propaganda. Though I suspect some of it is likely accurate.

I can agree that Wall Street and the banks did many things they should not have, but unlike you, I know the much bigger culprit for our economic crisis is the federal government...did that burst your class warfare bubble?

You are a so closed minded that you can't even take the time to find out what "Inside Job" is!

It is not Leftist propaganda. . .actually, it is a very non-partisan expose of what happen to bring us to the 2008 fiasco. . .and it doesn't spare anyone. In fact, it is so not "leftist" that it blames Obama for what he has done (keeping the same people who were major players in bringing up the fiasco) and not done (imposing some REAL regulations on banking).

And "class warfare" has existed since the 1980's. . .the big banks, with the complicity of "blind" and "laissez faire' governments have waged a cold war against the rest of America for the last 30 years. . .and they have won!. . . but now, hopefully, we are ready for the "second installment," when people do wake up and stop "drinking koolaid!"

But. . .obviously you prefer to stay in your stupid ignorance than take the time to even investigate the possibility that a source other than your extreme right propaganda can exist!

That's fine. . .more people like you enjoy swallowing in their stupid pool, and more chance we have that you will pick a "stupid pool" candidate to challenge Obama!

 

[dogtowner]

But. . .obviously you prefer to stay in your stupid ignorance than take the time to even investigate the possibility that a source other than your extreme right propaganda can exist!

That's fine. . .more people like you enjoy swallowing in their stupid pool, and more chance we have that you will pick a "stupid pool" candidate to challenge Obama!

think you could have injected the word stupid any more ?

does your movie address the "why" behind the creation of derivatives ? from what I can tell it seems to ignore that to make its preferred points.

 

[Openmind]

think you could have injected the word stupid any more ?

does your movie address the "why" behind the creation of derivatives ? from what I can tell it seems to ignore that to make its preferred points.

Yes it does. . .And if you had watched it, you would know.

But you may not make it through the whole movie, as it is more of a documentary with no sex and no violence (except hidden violence against the people!)

I dare you to watch it. . .with an open mind!

I don't think you can do it. . .it would be too difficult afterwards to continue to blame Obama for the recession, the bank bailouts, etc. . .

It might even change your view on what a Heroic leader Reagan was!

 

[dogtowner]

Yes it does. . .And if you had watched it, you would know.

But you may not make it through the whole movie, as it is more of a documentary with no sex and no violence (except hidden violence against the people!)

I dare you to watch it. . .with an open mind!

I don't think you can do it. . .it would be too difficult afterwards to continue to blame Obama for the recession, the bank bailouts, etc. . .

It might even change your view on what a Heroic leader Reagan was!

lots of background but it only addresses symptoms, not the disease. saved some time and looked for what I needed to see in the script. nothing new if one had been informed.

 

[Gipper]

You are a so closed minded that you can't even take the time to find out what "Inside Job" is!

It is not Leftist propaganda. . .actually, it is a very non-partisan expose of what happen to bring us to the 2008 fiasco. . .and it doesn't spare anyone. In fact, it is so not "leftist" that it blames Obama for what he has done (keeping the same people who were major players in bringing up the fiasco) and not done (imposing some REAL regulations on banking).

And "class warfare" has existed since the 1980's. . .the big banks, with the complicity of "blind" and "laissez faire' governments have waged a cold war against the rest of America for the last 30 years. . .and they have won!. . . but now, hopefully, we are ready for the "second installment," when people do wake up and stop "drinking koolaid!"

But. . .obviously you prefer to stay in your stupid ignorance than take the time to even investigate the possibility that a source other than your extreme right propaganda can exist!

That's fine. . .more people like you enjoy swallowing in their stupid pool, and more chance we have that you will pick a "stupid pool" candidate to challenge Obama!

I am not closed minded because I won't watch a movie on the causes of the economic crisis. I already KNOW how the economic crisis occurred and who are responsible.

But, you do confirm my suspicions with the condemnation of Reagan. Blaming Reagan for this current crisis is like blaming the actions of a theft on his long dead grandfather. But it is typical left wing tripe to dump on Reagan whenever possible...and you bought it without question.

 

[dogtowner]

I am not closed minded because I won't watch a movie on the causes of the economic crisis. I already KNOW how the economic crisis occurred and who are responsible.

But, you do confirm my suspicions with the condemnation of Reagan. Blaming Reagan for this current crisis is like blaming the actions of a theft on his long dead grandfather. But it is typical left wing tripe to dump on Reagan whenever possible...and you bought it without question.

well a peek at who funded this film will explain much of it's direction and emphasis.

it does mention that there was a problem with people getting mortgages who could not pay them but leaves off the why.

 

[Gipper]

it does mention that there was a problem with people getting mortgages who could not pay them but leaves off the why.

One would think that would be a very important part of any documentary on this subject. But since that would mean exposing many on the left who were directly implicated (Frank, Dodd, and others), proves the left wing bias.

 

[dogtowner]

One would think that would be a very important part of any documentary on this subject. But since that would mean exposing many on the left who were directly implicated (Frank, Dodd, and others), proves the left wing bias.

its standard procedure to data dump in an effort to obscure the obvious omission. works well for those who have a hard time recognizing cause and effect.