So you don't want to pay taxes?

In Capitalism, nothing trickles down except pollution.

Capital STARTS with the labor class, and moves up through the management and owner classes.

Capital goes one way-- up.

That's not sustainable.

No, you don't take money from the poor, you take money from the rich.

Let's say money is like balloons-- they just go up.

Now the economy is measured by how much those balloons move.

The way to keep those balloons moving, is to take the ones that are at the top, and move them back down to the bottom, so that they can move to the top again.

Very simply put.

hmmmm...could it be that the people who pay taxes wanted the idiots to CUT SPENDING first?

cutting taxes or spending is a dumb idea

the more taxes and the more spending on social services, the steadier the economy.

that's just a fact.

This has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Where in the hell do you get your "facts"?

so I ask you, why are so many californians so reliant on scocial programs? maybe theres a bigger problem here than not enough money... say maybe the system just doesnt work?

ever look around at these people and think, 'hey why are there so many on food stamps or financial aid, or housing grants... or ever step over a bum on the side walk and think 'why are there so many homeless and hungry people?' or think 'hey maybe our system doesn't work?'

just a thought.

I get my facts from reality. You should give it a try.

Look at Sweeden. France. Germany. Japan.

And the USA.

Which ones are socialist? Which ones use a Keynesian economic model?

And which ones are friedmanites? The USA with all it's lassiez-faire leanings and deregulation, and tax cuts, and cuts in social spending, is on it's KNEES economically.

Look at the southern cone during the 70s and 80s when the Chicago School of Economics helped stage coups down there.

They imposed their Milton Friedman, Neoclassical economic theories and those theories FAILED.

The more you cut social spending, the worse the economy gets, and the more inflation gets out of hand. Money ends up going into black markets, and people who would otherwise be employed at high wages and have money to spend on auxilary goods suddenly have no money to spend on even the basics. And without the flow of capital, the economy grinds to a halt.

The more you cut taxes, the worse the economy gets, and the more inflation gets out of hand.

Capital flows from the labor class to the class that owns the means of production, the owner class. Labor creates capital, and then that capital is taken by factory owners, and sold back to the labor class at a profit. The money that the owner class pays the labor class ends up back in the hands of the owner class. Eventually, all the money will end up in the hands of the owner class.

For capitalism to be sustainable, government needs to intervene and move that capital from the top to the bottom again, where it will start the journey back to the top.

The less regulation you have on speculative futures trading, the worse inflation gets. This is because futures commodities are largely fictional trades that create fictional wealth on paper, which is leveraged, but never actually exists. It creates the illusion of money existing that doesn't exist, and creates inflation of the dollar, by driving up prices of the commodities that are speculated on, like oil, which increases the cost of production across every single sector, without creating any additional value.

The Phillps Curve is a long debunked idea that inflation and minimum wages are somehow linked. Truth is, they aren't linked at all, and that's the consensus amongst economists, but the lie of the Phillips Curve still gets repeated today, even though it's patently false.

Minimum wages create a steady economy. The poorest classes put the most of their money, percentagewise towards concrete goods and services, things like groceries, housing, utilities, and transportation. These are the things that drive the economy.

When the bottom 50% runs out of money, the rest of the economy collapses, as we've seen today in the USA, as we saw in Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Venezuela, South Africa, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia, etc during the 1970s and 80s.

I've been studying this for a while. You should give it a shot.

asherp:

"For capitalism to be sustainable, government needs to intervene and move that capital from the top to the bottom again, where it will start the journey back to the top."

you mean the government ran by owned and controled 'the top' being an oligarchy... yeah thats just what humanity needs. these same douchbags that rape us all on goods, who also reap the profits of sales AND taxes... and will never pay their fair percentage in taxes... yeah lets give them MORE money, and totally violate the point of capitalism, that point being that you or I or anyone can build themselves up to be that 'top'... taxes nagate the whole thing by taking money from the people trying to build themselves up and handing it over to the ones who aren't doing anything for themselves let alone society.

No, the government, run and voted on by its citizens.

The system you propose sounds awful.

I think that's exactly what I said-- if you really NEVER EVER use a dime of tax payer funds, then you shouldn't have to pay them if you don't want.

It figures that you live in Idaho though. You might as well live in Siberia.

sounds like you need MORE socialism not LESS

"why do I still have to pay a water bill, sewer bill and electric bill?"

That's easy. To prevent you from wasting it. There's no profit made on that bill though, keep that in mind. That's why costs are minimal.

Unless they are provided by a private monopoly, in which case, you're probably being screwed, like the competitor to MunyLight in Cleveland, which consistently charges three times what Muny Light does.

The only time I've ever heard of anybody getting bill from the fire department is for a false alarm.

And labor laws have EVERYTHING to do with paying taxes.

Where do those laws exist? In the government. Which is funded by?

Now if you were to bring a case for a violation of labor laws, where would you bring it? The Court.

A body of the State. Funded by? Taxes.

Why should you be forced to pay for welfare? Because you can afford it. Suddenly these people on welfare are going to have more money to spend on other things that will help spur the economy.

Trickle-down economics is bullshit. The only way that money goes is up.

Preach it dariusvons. Right on Right on. Even people who pay taxes dont really know how they work or where they go. And they especially dont know about all the financial products banks, states, and the government create and sell generate revenue.

thanks, my sentiments exactly, just dint have time to type it. DUFUS here just needs to go back to the Constitution to find what we SHOULD be paying taxes for....

preach it

The reason why you're paying more than "your fair share" is because the tax burden has been shifted from the richest to the poorest.

Warren Buffet makes this point often, pointing out his secretary pays more in taxes than he does, which is true.

Warren Buffet would love to be taxed more, because he realizes that if the money he has is redistributed to the bottom 50% it just ends up back in his pocket anyways-- but instead of sitting in his bank account, it raises the standard of living of everybody on the way.

Unless you are talking about consumption taxes, the "poorest" pay ZERO taxes. They actually get money they did NOT pay in from the IRS's welfare division via the Earned Income Credit.

Well, no, a portion of our wages are garnished, but we get back some of it at the end of the year.

I don't know that it's true that we get more than we pay. That's how it ought to be though. It sucks being poor, and we're the ones who drive the economy.

When we run out of money, the rest of the economy falls down.

How do you drive the economy if you're poor? So you are saying that you use the free benefits that you get from the government on consumer based products only? Thus driving the economy? No the middle class drives the economy and the poor surely get more than they pay for.

Are YOU kidding? We pay some of the lowest taxes in the history of the US!! You must be twelve or something or don't read much.

In 1913, the top tax rate was 7% on incomes above $500,000 ($10 million 2007 dollars).

During World War I, the top rate rose to 77% and the income threshold to be in this top bracket increased to $1,000,000 ($16 million 2007 dollars);

after the war, the top rate was scaled down to a low of 24% and the income threshold for paying this rate fell to a low of $100,000 ($1 million 2007 dollars).

During the Great Depression and World War II, the top income tax rate rose from pre-war levels. In 1939, the top rate was 75% applied to incomes above $5,000,000 ($75 million 2007 dollars).

During 1944 and 1945, the top rate was its all-time high at 94% applied to income above $200,000.

Since 1964, the threshold for paying top income tax rate has generally been between $200,000 and $400,000.

The one exception is the period from 1982-1992 when the top income tax brackets were removed and incomes above around $100,000 (varies by year) paid the top rate. From 1988-1990, the threshold for paying the top rate was even lower, with incomes above $29,750 to $32,450 ($51,000 2007 dollars) paying the top rate of 28% in those years.

I was actually reading your reply until the word "some." Thus my point is proven.