Republican Tax Cuts For The Rich And The Debt Crisis

I lean toward agreeing with President Franklin Roosevelt that labor unions for government employees should not be allowed. They certainly should not be allowed for those whose already earn more than the median income.

 

Where will the rich move? In first world countries they will pay higher taxes. In third world countries they will encounter dirt roads, dangerous drinking water, high crime rates, and corrupt criminal justice systems.

In Japan and Germany CEO's earn less than American CEO's but Japanese and German consumer products are frequently better than American consumer products.

 

As a basic value assumption I think those who work as hard as they can should earn reasonably decent incomes.

 

Really, that much money! They will make them more paradise then they already are

The Top 15 Tax Havens for Millionaires Around the World (businessinsider.com)

They can come back here anytime and visit Unless your plan includes immediate capture and ransom ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

The problem with labor is, the more they earn the less they WANT TO WORK Been around a long time, and seen it all my life.. People only work as hard as it takes to pay for toys, living and what extra they need to PLAY..

 

If what you say is true, it is probably more true for employers.

 

No, it's what I say Granted, today, it may not be as easy as it where in my day, but the practice is still favored over killing yourself for a piece of time in your 60's..

Not saying life is great after retirement 60ish for most, but the real fun was 19 to 60 Youth is a treasure, aging is a pain in the ass! And working that ass off only increases the level of pains in the end.. Most young know this today..

 

They seem to be out of the way places.

 

The concept or the jobs

 

The locations.

 

OMG, we have/had jets flight now and in my time tOOO lol

 

I saw a chart the other day that put the reduction of the marginal rate and the explosion of the national debt during Reagan's presidency in stark relief. It marked an end to what was a more egalitarian society and began the grotesque march towards the incredible wealth amassed by the top 1%.

 

So no trickle down.

 

i don't think we need to solve keynes' general theory to understand that profits do not include overhead items like wages paid. a good high school "business" text should cover it.

at higher tax rates, increased wages are paid by the government (through tax deductions). at lower tax rates the employer covers more of the payroll. this obviously means that higher taxes mean higher employment and wages.

higher wages mean the boss wants less done at time and 1/2 so must hire more to work straight time shifts.

 

solidarity forever. nteu. i respectfully disagree re: government unions.

many government employees have dirty dangerous necessary jobs (i was at sea 2 months of every 4 (for over 20 years.) and without negotiation, i do not know what economic system you got, but it ain't "capitalism"

 

Where does it come from physically? While your answer certainly highlights your position, the comparison between a union and government leaves a gaping hole in the US version of the economy.

Let me try rephrasing. if the bottom of the ladder doesn't have monetary resources to create the ability to employ people in order to pay them, so they can go out and purchase goods that create demand, where does it come from?

 

Incorrect. Since FICA is a percentage base, those only earning a dollar, only pay 7.65% of that dollar. And if they earn $50, they pay 7.65% of that. While I disagree with the $160,200 wage cap on Social Security contributions, that is still a total of $12,255 paid into FICA.

So when it comes time to actually use the program, the pay out monthly amount is based on what was paid in over a specified time. But it doesn't stop once it equals what was paid in.

 

If a corporation were not to increase workers pay, then they will lose workers.

Somewhere, someone got the idea that people are glued to a particular employer by force or coercion. The ability to take one's skills and experience to the employment market is not limited, and can be beneficial to both the worker AND the employer.

 

Ditch diggers work hard but the VALUE of their labor isn't much. Its not about working HARD... its about working SMART. Someone who stays in school and learns the finance and legal ins and outs of business and manages an multi-million dollar acquisition and brings millions of dollars to a company may not work as HARD as a guy on the loading dock, but what he does is worth a LOT MORE to a company's bottom line, and to the shareholders, and he should be paid more for it.

 

Social Security was intended to be progressive. Poor people are supposed to get more out of it than they put in. Rich people are supposed to get less out of it.

 

i am. of course, correct. the fica tax rate on marginal income over $147,000 is 0%. social security pay outs are fixed by congress.

 

While some folks are born to money, anyone can EARN money. If you think you'll make more money if you just sit and wait for someone togive it to you, you'll be disappointed. Finish school. work hard, have ambition... and you'll see more money.

 

And?

 

Have you process a payroll lately? Social Security is 6.2% with a cap of $160,200. Medicare is 1.45% with no cap. And that is matched by the employer. There is also an additional .9% Medicare tax paid by the employee after $200,000 in earnings.

 

The word 'Crisis' in the topic headline may be in error. Unfortunately, these days it's used for everything north of a hangnail.

A crisis would obtain if, and only if, the cost of servicing the debt became more than the nation could pay.

That is not the present situation.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.