(October 12, 2011 at 2:19 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(October 12, 2011 at 2:03 pm)searchingforanswers Wrote: Hmm...That actually is very well explained and really helps me follow where they are coming from. (nowhere) so may I ask what type of system you prefer deist?

I now believe that life's a balance and the economy is no exception.

I don't believe that either the government or the corporations are the root of all problems. I think that both have their roles to play. Businesses generate the wealth and government regulation keeps them honest. Because business is motivated by profit maximization, there are some areas they can't effectively manage (such as health care) that should be run by the government. The wealthy deserve to be rewarded for their efforts but they should also pay their fair share of taxes to maintain the society that helped enable them to prosper. A strong middle class is also essential to a prosperous society, indeed what distinguishes a modern economy from a third world economy.

In sum, I believe in regulated capitalism.

Remove the wage system and you end most of the problems. Not all of them, but most of them. Society should not be enthralled by profit motive in that sense. Removing such will also make taxes obsolete.

(October 12, 2011 at 2:36 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(October 12, 2011 at 2:22 pm)searchingforanswers Wrote: So a flat tax for all?

No.

I believe taxes should be adjusted not according to income but ownership. Those that own pay to maintain. That's a principle that governs every other area of our society.

Let's say you and I own our own respective condo in the same association. The way condo associations work is each month every owner pays into a community fund that pays for maintaining common space, including lawn care, community facilities, cleaning the halls, etc.

Typically, the maintenance fees that each owner pay is assessed according to the size of their units. The more square footage you own, the more you pay. You own a greater percentage of the community and so you pay more to maintain that community.

So if you had a condo twice the size of mine but paid just as much each month, I'd feel like I was subsidizing your unit.

I'm not sure what % of the total wealth the top 1% own but I seem to remember it's around 1/3. This is counting stocks, real estate, bonds and other investments. Let's say for the sake of argument that this is true. This says to me that 1/3 of our total tax revenue should come from the top 1%.

Makes perfect sense. I think I get it. Do we have a flat tax now?

(October 12, 2011 at 2:17 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:believe that all the prosperity of society is generated by the top 1%.

The reality of course is that these Wall St. scumbags are not creating anything. They are fucking speculators who are stealing everything that isn't nailed down and transferring it to their own pockets.

Spot on, they do not create anything but personal wealth, they do nothing for mankind, give me a GSK or a Samsung any day.

No we don't have a flat tax now, we have a progressive tax.

With brackets for percentage of income. lets just say for simplicity there is a 10% tax and 20% tax. The 20% bracket is 50,000 dollars and above. 10% is 49,999 and below.
What lots of idiots do not understand is that you are not taxed ALL 50,000 at 20% only the income above 50,000 is taxed at 20% the rest is still taxed at 10%.

So when you hear someone say "yeah well I made some extra money and it put me in the higher tax bracket so I make less now!!!, I might as well have not taken the raise!!! "
Call them ignorant and to go read up on how the US tax system works.

And, everyone knows it.....

http://economistsview.typepad.com/econom...shift.html

Quote:As I’ve noted before, over the last three decades a stunning shift in income has taken place in this country, from the middle class to those few at the very top of the income scale. Back in 1979, the middle 20 percent of Americans had more than twice as large a share of the nation’s total after-tax income as the top 1 percent. But by 2007, the top 1 percent’s slice of the economic pie had more than doubled and in fact exceeded the middle class’s slice, which had shrunk.

A situation that the so-called 'libertarians' think is just peachy-keen!

(October 12, 2011 at 2:52 pm)Minimalist Wrote: A situation that the so-called 'libertarians' think is just peachy-keen!

those on the right side of that libertarian spectrum..possibly.. and some hard right most definitely. They view it as market actions finally showing signs of starting to be set free. They may even call it a "bump" and then promise that it will not last for long.

Moderate libertarians may see it from different viewpoints.

Those on the left side libertarianism find it absolutely dispicable and despotic...as a theft.

Then again, in America, the word "Libertarian" is typically viewed as "hard right Libertarianism".

in this sense I agree with you Min.. sure, they love it..thats what they want.

It is so blatantly obvious we are getting fucked in the ass hard with an un-lubed xtra large knobby dildo.

But MY FAVORITE REALITY SHOW IS ON TONIGHT SO I DON'T GIVE A FUCK LALALALALA Magical sky gods and fairy godmothers will save us allllll.

We are conditioned in the USA not to think. Not to question people in authority. Authority = always right. That's what they want you to think.
No one can understand the complexity of the world when you take all knowledge at face value. We would still think the earth was the center of the universe and that the earth was flat if people never QUESTIONED authority's answers.

So when you go, well why the fuck are these people so damn rich and how did they get rich? The answers flow to you and things become much clearer, I think they also try to over complicate everything so people don't want to think or become knowledgeable about things. " Well they are the ones in charge, they know what they are doing" HA HA HA

Don't for one second think that just because someone is "rich" or a "lawyer" or a "politician" or a "police man" or a "senior" or a "veteran" that they know any better than you, or are honest and trustworthy. Some are some are not, can't make sweeping generalizations about certain people.... but "they" do. "You can always trust an adult", "You can trust a police man" yeah until he picks you up and forces you to suck his dick with the threat of imprisonment, then does it for years with multiple girls. Just a recent story in my town FYI.

(October 12, 2011 at 2:36 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I believe taxes should be adjusted not according to income but ownership. Those that own pay to maintain. That's a principle that governs every other area of our society.

So what about people who save for most of their lives in order to actually buy a house of their own? Now they have to pay more because of it?

The problem with a system like that is that you seem to be ignoring how it affects the poorest people. With, say, a 10% tax rate, 10% of $1000 is $100 gone in tax. That leaves the person with $900 left. In your system, they are left with $1000, but are then subsequently "taxed" on whatever they buy with that $1000, which will probably end up being more than $100 (you didn't really go into the rates).

Could you explain this a bit more? I'm probably not understanding it right.

(October 12, 2011 at 2:23 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(October 12, 2011 at 7:53 am)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Like it really matters to me if you're guy or not. This is a general statement, to all here.

That is the second time you have made a direct reply to me and then backtracked and said it was a general statement to all.

Which means that you should have understood it by now.

(October 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Which means that you should have understood it by now.

Wait, you want me to understand that when you quote and respond to someone, you are not actually responding to them? No, learn to use the quote tags properly and address the person to which you are responding. Don't expect me to sort out your daft manner of replying.