• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What do the wealthy spend their money on? It wasn't entirely what I expected

Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Audie said:
Tossing out a slogan from the 80s would not
be a killer knock down argument without the Lol.
Click to expand...
Partisans & their slogans....tsk, tsk, tsk.
Some on the right cry "It's socialism!".
"Trickle down economics" is just another.
Ways of referencing something without
actually saying anything about it.
 
Shad

Shad

Veteran Member
Curious George said:
A question asked because he stated that over-taxing the rich would stop the economy. Context is key.
Click to expand...

Nope as the tax point was sarcasm and about increasing taxes on the rich not tax relief. You are injecting context that is not present.
 
Curious George

Curious George

Veteran Member
Shad said:
Nope as the tax point was sarcasm and about increasing taxes on the rich not tax relief. You are injecting context that is not present.
Click to expand...
While it is possible that I am injecting context that is not present, I disagree. The question was asked directly related to a statement taxing the rich. The explanation provided was therefore meant to imply over-taxing the rich hurts the economy by limiting them from the aforementioned contributions. If I misinterpreted that perhaps @Nakosis can shed some light.
 
Curious George

Curious George

Veteran Member
Audie said:
Sorry-ah, I did not realize you feel so uneasy!

We will try to go easy on ya, ya poor sweet darlin"!
Click to expand...
Not sure why you would think that, go ahead and crank it up a notch. No worries on this end, though you might have to google the vernacular, as it seems you are having trouble comprehending me.
 
Audie

Audie

Veteran Member
Shad

Shad

Veteran Member
Curious George said:
While it is possible that I am injecting context that is not present, I disagree. The question was asked directly related to a statement taxing the rich. The explanation provided was therefore meant to imply over-taxing the rich hurts the economy by limiting them from the aforementioned contributions. If I misinterpreted that perhaps @Nakosis can shed some light.
Click to expand...

No it was about increasing taxes on the rich. "Tax the w/e out of the 1%." You are sill wrong .Being against taxing the w/e out of the rich does not equate trickle down economics and tax relief for the rich. Read the posts again.

You own comment shows you have no idea what trickle down economic is if you think not "over-taxing" equates tax relief. Over-taxing is excessive taxing not normal taxing.
 
Curious George

Curious George

Veteran Member
Shad said:
No it was about increasing taxes on the rich. "Tax the w/e out of the 1%." You are sill wrong .Being against taxing the w/e out of the rich does not equate trickle down economics and tax relief for the rich. Read the posts again.

You own comment shows you have no idea what trickle down economic is if you think not "over-taxing" equates tax relief. Over-taxing is excessive taxing not normal taxing.
Click to expand...
Drats, I knew I should have put "over taxing" in quotes.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Curious George said:
While it is possible that I am injecting context that is not present, I disagree. The question was asked directly related to a statement taxing the rich. The explanation provided was therefore meant to imply over-taxing the rich hurts the economy by limiting them from the aforementioned contributions. If I misinterpreted that perhaps @Nakosis can shed some light.
Click to expand...

I think "over taxing" the rich is a bad solution. The more money people have the more likely they will spend stimulating the economy. This include rich folks. Also if you tax someone to the point they feel it is unfair they will simply leave or find ways to avoid paying taxes. Rich folks have a lot of mobility. They can leave a community when they what and move to a more favorable tax environment. If your plan is to fund your government on the rich, what happens when they leave town?

Redistribution of wealth IMO is a bad idea. What you really want is to be able to increase the ability to generate wealth. The problem it not the people who are good at creating wealth. The problem is with people who have problems creating wealth. You are not really helping them by taking someone else's wealth away and giving to the wealth challenged. They will just continue to be an every increasing burden on the economy. You need to teach them how to generate wealth.
 
Shad

Shad

Veteran Member
Curious George said:
Drats, I knew I should have put "over taxing" in quotes.
Click to expand...

It is not so much that as the post chain goes back to an extreme view of taxing the rich not tax reform itself such as loopholes or enabling average citizens to use the system to their own advantage like the rich can afford to via tax accountants.
 
Curious George

Curious George

Veteran Member
Nakosis said:
I think "over taxing" the rich is a bad solution. The more money people have the more likely they will spend stimulating the economy. This include rich folks. Also if you tax someone to the point they feel it is unfair they will simply leave or find ways to avoid paying taxes. Rich folks have a lot of mobility. They can leave a community when they what and move to a more favorable tax environment. If your plan is to fund your government on the rich, what happens when they leave town?

Redistribution of wealth IMO is a bad idea. What you really want is to be able to increase the ability to generate wealth. The problem it not the people who are good at creating wealth. The problem is with people who have problems creating wealth. You are not really helping them by taking someone else's wealth away and giving to the wealth challenged. They will just continue to be an every increasing burden on the economy. You need to teach them how to generate wealth.
Click to expand...
The question at hand is whether your comment on how the rich contribute was related to how they should be taxed.
 
Audie

Audie

Veteran Member
Curious George said:
I see even google cannot help you. Well, I guess you will have to settle for letting go that of which you cannot fathom.
Click to expand...

You are settling for "blame the audience"? I can googlize as well as the next,

I thought about saying trickle down economics works, Psych! But settled on the response that was written. Lul.

The first time, you wrote "Lol". Are you now
lul-ing yourself, or, misquoting yourself?
 
Curious George

Curious George

Veteran Member
Audie said:
You are settling for "blame the audience"? I can googlize as well as the next,

I thought about saying trickle down economics works, Psych! But settled on the response that was written. Lul.

The first time, you wrote "Lol". Are you now
lul-ing yourself, or, misquoting yourself?
Click to expand...
No, I am lul-ing you.
 
Shad

Shad

Veteran Member
Curious George said:
Yes but that is merely an exaggeration of the idea in the disagreement on what constitutes over taxing.
Click to expand...

Not really when the post in question was taxing the w/e out of the 1%. That is not a fair tax system but is merely jealousy and revenge within a class dynamic. Typical Marxism due to Karl himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top