Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
yes if the liberal can make you think that eroding the value of your money is a mystery rather than a direct result of their printing money they are free to print as much as they want. It should be 100% illegal to print money except for the purpose of keeping inflation at 0%.Originally Posted by smurf
I know of several long term deals that were never made becuase parties could not agree on how much inflation they should build into their calculations about future rents and revenues.
If inflation was guaranteed by law to be at or close to 0% a great deal of uncertainty would be removed and a great deal of new economic growth would take place..
Citizen
Here you seem to be against govt roads.Why the fuck do people keep pretending I want to give more money to people on the government dole? The only thing I support giving to able bodied adults is medical care. That's it. No food stamps, no housing assistance, nothing else.
Secretary of State
No. That was against simply giving people money, as in welfare. Providing the infrastructure necessary for people to do business is another matter which I, obviously, fully support.
All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist
Citizen
Ok then, back to the topic.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
econ 101 for you. A tariff raises prices for some goods but does not change the money supply so the price of other goods must then be lowered. Supply equals demand!!
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
the rich should not pay more in taxes since they are our most productive citizens. Tax capital gains and there is less venture capital, for example, for Googles and Intels, etc etc. Its 100% suicidal and 100% liberal,i.,e., based on perfect ignorance.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
thats an easy one, if you want healthcare welfare, then you'd want welfare for the more important things like food clothing and shelter. What good is healthcare without food clothing and shelter?
Secretary of State
People can get food, clothing, and shelter, without paying $500 just to be seen and thousands more on top of that for actual treatment.
All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist
Citizen
Econ 101 for you. I was speaking in terms of everything else being equal. Whatever the cause, consumer prices going up without production going up is the defintion of inflation. Obviously if there are alternative goods, people will switch to those. However, the less artificial controls on the market, such as tarrifs, the better.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
actually there are many who need food clothing and shelter!!! Ask someone without food or shelter if he'd rather have free healthcare or food. GOt it now.
As a liberal your bleeding heart wants to put them on the dole, right??
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
don't be absurd, everything else is not equal. When the liberals goofs pass a tariff bill they don't print exrtra money so people can afford the tarrifed items.
THey go up in price while other things must go down by the same exact amount, thus the supply equals demand and the general price level stays identical.
Secretary of State
Nope. He can get his own food.
I don't see why this is hard for you to understand. If I can go to any area with high foot traffic, spend an hour holding a sign, and have the money to buy something, the government doesn't need to buy it for me.
If I have to spend more money than I make in a year to get minimal care (not enough to leave myself in a position where I'm capable of working) the government should remedy that situation.
If we had a socialist healthcare system, I'd be in better shape, making more money, and paying more taxes. Without it, I'm stuck delivering pizza for sub minimum wage. (Technically there are other things I can do, I tried driving a cab for a while, but that didn't pay as much.)
All good socialists have villas in Southern France. That's not the point.
-Eurosocialist
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
million don't get their own food or shelter. Screw em, right??? Come on where is the bleeding heart???
agreed
yes with a capitalist system that drives down prices so everyone can afford it, not a socialist sytem that killed 100 millions by slow poverty in the USSR and China
dear, socialism makes everyone poorer that is why Red China switched. Its been in all the papers
U.S. House Representative
It is hard to tax capital gains and more and more income will be attributable to capital gains as time passes.
This is ultimately the problem with taxing the rich.
It would be better to allow the rich to form corporations and tax their capital gains at a lowered corp tax rate but if they receive those gains as an individual they pay the full income tax on it.
Sorry to have been out of the conversation for a while…family tragedy. Last week I received a response which I will address later that basically said the inflation has raised but we are better off now than in 1960. Basically our government is lying to us, we are not better off now than we were then AND the rich, while paying a higher percentage of collected revenue are still paying a smaller percentage than the average middle class working family. I am a firm believer that the only fair way to operate the tax structure is in a flat tax system. Everyone will pay an equal percentage of their income (wages, bonuses, etc.) into the government, directly deducted from their checks. No forms to be filed at the end of the year, no loop holes to crawl through, no “hiding” income. Many cities in the US use this approach and it works very well, plus you have the side benefit of not having the mad rush once a year for all of the final tax filers, the additional cost of tax form publications, the added expense of mailing all of those forms. The only thing left for the IRS to focus on would be corporate taxes because of the nature of profit and loss associated with business, as far as “capital gain” it’s still income and should be taxes as such. Flat tax makes the most sense a person earning say 40,000 paying 20% would be %8,000 in taxes a year and a person making $10,000,000 paying 20% would pay $2,000,000, this makes everything absolutely equal.
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks