Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Higher taxes are wrong and bad for the economy, no matter who you tax

Posted 2 years ago on May 23, 2012, 4:47 p.m. EST by ilovewallstreet (-27)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Cant believe what im reading. you people are marxists, socialists, worshiping a system that died in the USSR over 20m years ago. why take people's earned income? or their inheritance? how is that justice? is that what are founding fathers had in mind? of course not. and the idea to take peoples inheritance and give it to the State is rediculous. if we've learned anything its that the state is the worse choice when it comes to using capital efficiently. are you people even remotely educated on the basics of finance, economics, and most importantly, the Constitution?

42 Comments

42 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Can't believe what I am reading. Oh, no, wait. Your username is ilovewallstreet and you just joined today. Fuck yeah, I believe what I am reading.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago
[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Before making such a post, you should at least learn correct spelling, syntax, and grammar.,

Socialism, Marxism, communism, anarchism were not proven wrong nor did they die when the Soviet Union failed. The Soviet Union was an abbreviated example of our society: one that began with grand ideals but degenerated into an oligarchy, which only proves what anarchists have contended for centuries. "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely."

[-] -3 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

whats your point? which of the above systems works better than capitalism? and please provide one example.

[-] -3 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

whats your point? which of the above systems works better than capitalism? and please provide one example.

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

And how does capitalism work? It is a failed system right here, right now.

[-] -3 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

its seems to work fine. works for me, im employed and making lots of money. how about you? ohhh. i see. one problem with capitalism is that it tends to punish lazy people, and losers. which are you?

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

I'm all of the above and want to live off the fruits of uneducated people; keep on working.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

He shoots! He scores!!!

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

We want a form of capitalism that works for all the people. The British Free Trade system we have now is not American, in fact, it is anti American, and its not even really capitalism, its just a form of imperialism that is made to look like capitalism.

The "American System" of economics is what I want back:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_System_%28economic_plan%29

Its the system we used to have, in which most people, even without a college education, could get good paying jobs, buy houses and cars and put their kids through college.

It was once even the mission of America to export the American System to the developing countries of world, help them move towards first world status, and eliminate poverty world wide.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Taxes do not fund government spending but are used to control the amount of money in circulation and behavior.

[-] -3 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

Then where does the money come from that finances our budget?

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Read the link I provided and you will have your answers. I did not post the link for my health, but yours. Take the time and learn.

[-] -1 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

just curious, did you go to college? if so what did you major in?

[-] 0 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Now you want to make this personal? Typical right wing tactic. You can't win on facts so you look for avenues to attack the debater. If you are so interested you can look up my profile.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Learn the macroeconomic rules of a fiat currency system. You and quite a few others a stuck in the mentality of pre-1971 economics which no longer apply. Once Nixon closed the gold window the rules of the game changed.

Here is the handbook:

http://pragcap.com/understand-the-modern-monetary-system/understanding-modern-monetary-system

[+] -4 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

wow. you really have no clue do you? that link is about the monetary system, which is how the Fed regulates the money supply, provides liquidity to, and regulates capital in the economy through the banking system. This has nothing to do (directly at least) with the governments annual budget, which is simply the annual inflow of tax receipts and the outflow of expenditures. Your response pretty much sums up this whole OWS thing -- you guys are all hopped up, emotional, whining, and ready to change the world, but its so sad because you're all so clueless.

[-] 3 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

you insult folks you know nothing about, as if you are superior and have occult knowledge, that us peons could simple not comprehend,. and like many right-wing trolls you define yourself in your name-calling and accusations. clueless and pathetic,. truly sad.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I don't pretend to control google

[-] 1 points by writerconsidered123 (344) 2 years ago

i think you do and microsoft too

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Taxes and budgets are covered, and yes I do have a clue. I am just tired of regurgitating the same material over and over to others who should do the research themselves. Now please read and make an effort to understand it, I'm not going to hold your hand during this exercise. Given your quick response, you barely skimmed it.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by writerconsidered123 (344) 2 years ago

If the economic system we would'nt be here now. If the banks didn't make a collosal screwup we wouldn't be here now. If business created jobs then something would have change in the last four years and we wouldn't be here.

How has the last 4 years worked for you ? for me not so good, if it had worked well for me I wouldn't be here.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

just so you know,. taxing wealthy people is a simple democratic check,. you fail. if you love wallstreet you are not so smart, that system holds profits over every other consideration is ruining the planet,. and this will effect you too, silly monkey.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by shooz (17823) 2 years ago

Yes, higher taxes on the rich can help.

In case you missed it.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/breaking-you-know-that-ted-talk-you-werent-suppose/

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Higher taxes on the rich perform a different function, and yes they can help as a behavior modifying tool. He makes a good argument but he misses the macroeconomic boat as well.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17823) 2 years ago

Until MMT is adopted, taxation on the "job creators" will still help.

Watch the TED talk. It's short.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Shooz I have. I like the guy. MMT accurately describes our monetary system. Following policy that is contrary to how that system works only causes more problems.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17823) 2 years ago

I'm in full agreement......:)

The more I learn about MMT, the more sense it makes.

[-] -3 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

Ted says silly things. Ted is clueless. ted says the rich don't create jobs, but that consumers create demand by buying things. how do consumers buy things if they dont have jobs? yes its circular, but the most important part of that circle is putting people to work, which is what businesses do -- businesses hire people, right? businesses are big and small, most of them are small, and the small ones are owned by people, people who happen to be either rich, sometimes but not always, or just better off than the rest of us. lower taxes on these people allow more investment in growing their business, which in turn leads to hiring. this is how it works. ECON 101. So your man Ted is ignorant, or a fraud, in either case he's wrong. Reagan proved that 30 years ago. im done with this OWS site. you and all OWS backers are just plain idiots. pointless brainless idiots. goodbye.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Have you ever run a business? The very last thing a business wants to do is hire staff. That increases overhead which cuts into profit. A business will only hire if demand for its product forces it to.

One does not need to be wealthier than anyone else to start a business. One just needs the skills to produce a good that sells.

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

I have run a businesses and without it there would be no jobs or products for anyone to buy. So, where does it start - it starts with a business producing something, not a consumer buying something that isn't there.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

It can't possibly start with a business producing something. Demand has to come first. I can sit and make a million widgets all day long, but if nobody wants my widgets I'm not selling them.

There has to be a demand for the product in the first place, and that demand can only come from one place... the consumer.

The real question is where does money come from? And its not from rich people.... its issued by the government.

[-] -2 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

Ted says silly things. Ted is clueless. ted says the rich don't create jobs, but that consumers create demand by buying things. how do consumers buy things if they dont have jobs? yes its circular, but the most important part of that circle is putting people to work, which is what businesses do -- businesses hire people, right? businesses are big and small, most of them are small, and the small ones are owned by people, people who happen to be either rich, sometimes but not always, or just better off than the rest of us. lower taxes on these people allow more investment in growing their business, which in turn leads to hiring. this is how it works. ECON 101. So your man Ted is ignorant, or a fraud, in either case he's wrong. Reagan proved that 30 years ago. im done with this OWS site. you and all OWS backers are just plain idiots. pointless brainless idiots. goodbye.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

So.........you are going to log out and then log in under another ID?

See ya in a minute.

[-] -1 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

now why would i do that?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Why? Because, you sir, are a dick nose. That's why.

[-] -1 points by ilovewallstreet (-27) 2 years ago

does that mean i have a dick on my nose? or that my nose IS a dick?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Quit stalling and start logging out and logging back in already.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I don't know

why break oneself to pieces?

Led Zepplin-Stairway to Heaven (best quality)

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Still here.... not a man of his word I see.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

You're wrong. Corporations and the wealthy are only 'potential' job creators. If there is demand. They don't create jobs for the sake of creating jobs. They are not job creators. They are suppliers. Their purpose is to meet demand. Not create jobs.

There is no business person who creates a job because taxes are lowered. Unless there is demand. Business today is not constrained by taxes or regulations. The problem is demand.

If business was cash strapped, and could not profitably afford to hire enough people to meet demand, and demand exceeded supply, then it would be perfectly appropriate to lower taxes. But that is not the problem right now.

And they aren't going to hire until demand increases. Not the other way around. They don't hire first (because taxes are lowered) as a way to increase demand. That's why it has always been the role of government to stimulate demand during a recession.

The problem is demand. The system is stuck.

See Figure D http://www.epi.org/publication/regulatory-uncertainty-phony-explanation/

[-] -1 points by shooz (17823) 2 years ago

Please allow the door to hit you on the way out.

you deserve it.