Thought of the day

Republican policies have traditionally increased the income gap.

15 Responses

  1. Lately, Republican policies = “Just say no”, which isn’t a policy at all.

  2. So what?

  3. Yeah, who cares if the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Who even wants a strong middle-class anyway?

  4. That’s not what you said though. You pointed to the income gap and nothing else.

    Whats it been like since the democrats took control of congress in 2006? Since 2008?

  5. Nate has a good question. Why should we be concerned if there is an income gap, and why do you say Republican policies are responsible?

  6. We should all be concerned with the income gap. Not, i think, in the way Michael (Hawkins) is though.

    What concerns me about it is that is seems many would punish those who are successful. I don’t mean they would see its as punishment but I consider it to be so.

    If a person makes 1,000,000$ a year why should they pay a higher percentage in taxes than I? Do they receive more government services? Do they expend more tax dollars? Quite the opposite in fact.

    The fact that they have more money should not matter, although I don’t have a problem with taxing at a higher rate the more money you make. My issues come here:

    If you live in New York state and you were to make 1,000,000 this year, in April you would pay out more than 500,000 of that to the state and federal governments. In fact closer to 600,000. If you live in NYC even more.

    Granted there are tax “loopholes” that allow them to reduce their tax liability and in general wealthy people give more money to charity which also lessens the impact.

    So what to do? Its said the capitalism’s biggest problem is that it shares wealth unequally, while Socialism’s biggest problem is that is shares misery equally. I don’t recall who said words to that effect, but it is true.

    If we are all equal under law than it follows that each should pay an equal share in taxes. Closing loopholes that allow high earning people to write off most their tax liability is a problem, not the tax rate.

    In the short term it probably has more to do with business and investors feeling that there is less uncertainty (with regards to government interference in business) with republicans in power than any of their specific policies.

    Last, I have tried in vain to find anything showing over a long period of time that republicans being in power, either in congress or holding the presidency, has any noticeable effect on how much of the nations wealth resides with the top 1%. In fact during the Reagan administration the top 1% held about the same as during Carter. Bush 1 and Clinton the top 1% gained more of the nations wealth and during Bush they first decreased their holdings than increased to Clinton levels.

    What does that mean? Not a damn thing! Control of congress and the presidency bounced back and forth, only for short periods controlled both by the same party.

    This “thought” is less thought and more politics.

  7. As long as we’re talking about the top 1%, perhaps we should thank them for taking on 40% of the tax burden.

  8. of the Federal* tax burdon

  9. That’s not what you said though. You pointed to the income gap and nothing else.

    Yeah, silly me. Nobody knows anything about the income gap or why it’s important. It must be explained.

    Whats it been like since the democrats took control of congress in 2006? Since 2008?

    Effects of Republican policies and continued Republican policies in some cases.

  10. Such sound logic.

  11. How dare they make more than everyone else! Tax that money away! Our children should learn that success is being on reality TV not enjoying financial success!

  12. Consider what Micheal (not Hawkins) said too the top 1% may control 18% of the wealth but they are responsible for more than 40% of the federal tax too. The doesn’t sound like equal treatment by the government to me.

  13. I’m more concerned with making sure everyone has food and shelter than “fairly” letting rich people become ever more comfortable.

  14. I don’t think the answer is to tax the people that pay 40% of the taxes already to pay for the people that pay less than 3%.

    Probably a better solution is to congressionally charter/create nonprofits to handle the job and make contributions to these entities 100% tax deductible to a certain amount.

    If you use tax dollars God only knows how much of that tax money gets burned up going through layers of bureaucracy before it would even get to the people that need assistance.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: