Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Help Political Junkies who said this?

Old 03-23-07, 11:30 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
 
BKenn01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Blue Nation!
Posts: 4,497
Help Political Junkies who said this?

I remember reading a quote from I believe it was a congressmen voting on either the 16th amendmant or the actual passage of the income tax that went something like "If we pass an income tax today, someday it will be 5%" or something to that effect. I have googled every way I can imagine and cant find it again.

Thanks for any help you can give.
BKenn01 is offline  
Old 03-24-07, 09:25 AM
  #2  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
It's very memorable, isn't it?

BTW: That's about the percentage (or less) that many Repubs think the top 1% should pay.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-24-07, 10:36 AM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
That's about the percentage (or less) that I think I should pay
Venusian is offline  
Old 03-24-07, 11:03 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Th0r S1mpson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 36,443
“Where there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.” — Plato

“I am proud to be paying taxes in the United States. The only thing is – I could be just as proud for half the money.” — Arthur Godfrey
Th0r S1mpson is offline  
Old 03-24-07, 10:14 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
 
BKenn01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Blue Nation!
Posts: 4,497
Join Date: Jun 1999 It's very memorable, isn't it?

BTW: That's about the percentage (or less) that many Repubs think the top 1% should pay.
Why should they pay more? They are the ones who create jobs. The poor dont feed us.
BKenn01 is offline  
Old 03-25-07, 09:04 AM
  #6  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Most jobs in the country are created by the rich?

I thought they were created by small business - at least that what the Repubs tell everyone.

I wish you'll would get your stories straight. You're confusing the rest of us.

Last edited by classicman2; 03-25-07 at 09:06 AM.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-25-07, 09:09 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,368
Originally Posted by classicman2
BTW: That's about the percentage (or less) that many Repubs think the top 1% should pay.
My counter: This [95%] is about the percentage (or more) that many Dcats think the top 1% should pay.
bwvanh114 is offline  
Old 03-25-07, 09:25 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by classicman2
Most jobs in the country are created by the rich?

I thought they were created by small business - at least that what the Repubs tell everyone.

I wish you'll would get your stories straight. You're confusing the rest of us.
Sigh... once again, C-man, I'll explain trickle-down economics. And I'll use small words, since this extremely simple concept seems to have escaped you entirely.

Let's start with Bob. Bob is a rich, rich man. He pays $1 million in taxes each year.

(While we're on the subject... how many of the richest 1% of Americans pay any taxes at all? I know that many of the Fortune 500 companies pay no corporate income taxes... I've gotta think that the Richie Richs of the world are probably getting by each April 15th scot-free. But I digress.)

Now we're going to come along and cut his taxes, so he only gets charged $500,000. So Bob now has an extra $500,000 sitting around. What is Bob going to do with the money?

That's right -- Bob is going to spend it. Because when he had $20,000,000 in disposable income, Bob was something of a skinflint, but now that he has an extra $500,000 laying around, by God he's going to use it.

So Bob takes that $500,000 and he puts it right back into the economy, by throwing a lavish party at his palatial estate. Now, to do this, he has to create jobs. There's the guy that mows his lawn. (Illegal immigrant, $100 under the table, but don't tell the INS.) There's the caviar import company, who gets $72,000 from Bob for some delicious Beluga caviar. And then there's the decorations, the invites that get dropped in the mail, money spent on the ice sculpture guys... it all eventually "trickles down". (The ice sculpture guys, for instance, stop and buy their kids food from McDonalds after a long hard day at work, so Bob's money is getting pumped right back into the economy yet again.)

And of course, we need to hire waiters for this fine soiree, so we'll bring in twenty people from the local temp agency, including Phil, who is, actually, poor. So Phil gets one-tenth of one percent of that money ($50) -- plus tips! -- to walk around carrying a large tray of crispy canapés to feed all the well-to-dos that are feasting on Bob's magnaminous $500,000 to our national economy.

(And in a nice touch of irony... it turns out that the poor... in the form of Phil, who takes his $50 dollars home that night to buy medicine for his sick kid... actually are feeding us! Touché , Mister Kenn01. Touché.)
NCMojo is offline  
Old 03-25-07, 11:35 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Working for Gizmonic Institute
Posts: 10,430
Ah, the straw man. Its so much more convenient than bringing facts to the table.
crazyronin is offline  
Old 03-25-07, 11:38 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 14,204
Originally Posted by crazyronin
Ah, the straw man. Its so much more convenient than bringing facts to the table.
Actually, my whole post was just a satirical dig at "voodoo economics"... and, well, a small dig at BKenn for his riddiculous "poor people don't feed us" line. If you actually want to debate supply-side economics, I think you would probably get a better argument from an extremely well-educated border collie.
NCMojo is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 01:15 PM
  #11  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles...59801244132094
Who Really Pays?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, March 26, 2007 4:20 PM PT

Fiscal Policy: It's a matter of faith for some that tax cuts and government spending help the rich, while leaving crumbs for the poor. But as with most conventional wisdom, nothing could be further from the truth.

Typical is this quote from the online journal Democracy: 'Call it phony universalism, Robin Hood in reverse, or socialism for the rich — whatever the name, the U.S. government is effectively targeting tax subsidies and legal protections at the more advantaged members of American society.'

Now here's the reality: The rich are being taxed at ever-higher levels, while more workers at the bottom of the income ladder are paying no taxes at all. As for spending, resources flowing to those at the bottom far outstrip those flowing to those at the top.

Far from 'favoring the rich,' as many believe, our tax code is massively redistributionist, sending literally trillions of dollars into low-income homes and far less into wealthy homes. This may be good or bad, depending on your point of view, but the fact is it's happening. And those who argue that recent tax cuts 'benefit the rich' ignore the reality.



A new study by the Tax Foundation shows the extent of the redistribution. The lowest-earning one-fifth of households, it says, get about $8.21 in total government spending for each dollar of taxes paid. Households deemed 'middle income' get $1.30 in return for every dollar sent to Washington. The rich get back 40 cents.

Looking at both taxes and spending in a representative year — 2004 — the study found an estimated $1.03 trillion to $1.53 trillion was 'redistributed downward' from the two highest-earning income quintiles. That's a lot of redistribution.

Today, some 44 million Americans pay no taxes at all. Meanwhile, the upper 5% of all income earners in 2004 paid 57.13% of all taxes, up from 35.01% in 1980. In other words, the U.S. tax code is becoming more progressive, not less.

No one minds helping the truly needy. But as with welfare in the pre-1996 reform era, reliance on government can become a habit — imposing huge costs on our national economy.

Worse, a 'what's in it for me?' attitude seems increasingly the norm. Once a nation of stoic, self-reliant individualists, America now seems full of people who think other taxpayers owe them something. They see the 'system' as a giant cow to be milked — and damn the cow.

This is backed up by polling data. In a 1994 Pew poll, 57% agreed with the statement 'Government should care for those who can't care for themselves.' Today, it's 69%.

It's sad enough when a nation punishes its most productive citizens and rewards the least productive. But the real shame is that there are so many myths about taxes and poverty we can't even have an honest discussion about it.
They're using kinder words than I do for people who think and say that the tax cuts were for the rich.
bhk is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 01:31 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
What percentage does the Bush tax cuts go to top 3%?

What percentage will the Bust tax cuts (if they were extended) go to the top 3% in 2012.

Try not to go off in one of your 'what percentage of the total tax revenues do they pay.' Refrain yourself from your usual rant.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 01:36 PM
  #13  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,740
Originally Posted by classicman2
What percentage does the Bush tax cuts go to top 3%?

What percentage will the Bust tax cuts (if they were extended) go to the top 3% in 2012.

Try not to go off in one of your 'what percentage of the total tax revenues do they pay.' Refrain yourself from your usual rant.
Unless your goal of a tax cut is redistribution of wealth it absolutely matters what percentage a group pays relative to the percentage of tax relief they receive.

I don't have the figures at my fingertips but I believe the top 3% ended up paying a higher percentage of total taxes after the "Bust tax cuts".
X is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 01:54 PM
  #14  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Originally Posted by classicman2
What percentage does the Bush tax cuts go to top 3%?

What percentage will the Bust tax cuts (if they were extended) go to the top 3% in 2012.

Try not to go off in one of your 'what percentage of the total tax revenues do they pay.' Refrain yourself from your usual rant.
Do you have any facts that contradict the study I posted or is this your usual no-facts-rhetorical-question cman2 post?

Oh, and I expect some praise from you for my internet diagnosis skill in the 2008 political thread.
bhk is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 02:27 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
No, I simply would like for you to answer the question.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 02:35 PM
  #16  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
What percentage does the Bush tax cuts go to top 3%?
The top rate was cut by 2-3%. Those people now pay a higher percentage of the tax revenue now than they did before the tax cut. That is a fact.

The tax cuts don't "give" anyone money, people who earned it get to keep more of it themselves. I know people don't like to hear that because they want to see the successful punished but there it is.
bhk is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 02:38 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
The Bush tax cuts increased revenue?

What happened to overall revenue for 2 years after the Bush tax cuts became law?

You still haven't answered the question.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 02:42 PM
  #18  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Originally Posted by classicman2
The Bush tax cuts increased revenue?
Yes it did


What happened to overall revenue for 2 years after the Bush tax cuts became law?
Who cares? We were hit with terror attacks that took a lot from our economy.
Look at the long term result. We've had record revenue due to the tax cut stimulating the economy.

You still haven't answered the question.
Yes I did.
bhk is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 03:11 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Do you suppose that the economic recovery from the recession might have had a little do with the increase in revenue - the third year following the Bush tax cuts?

The voodoo economic folks seem to dismiss that idea.

They seem to give all the credit to the tax cuts. Yet they seem to want to argue traditional economics (cycles) to explain why it took more than 2 years for revenues to increase.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 03-27-07, 05:48 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
The Bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 54,866
Originally Posted by classicman2
Do you suppose that the economic recovery from the recession might have had a little do with the increase in revenue - the third year following the Bush tax cuts?

The voodoo economic folks seem to dismiss that idea.

They seem to give all the credit to the tax cuts. Yet they seem to want to argue traditional economics (cycles) to explain why it took more than 2 years for revenues to increase.
What years are we talking about?
The Bus is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.