The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 39    Average: 3/5]
64 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 10223
Rating: 3
Category:
Date: 09/22/11 02:16 PM

64 Responses to Elizabeth Warren on Debt Crisis, Fair Taxation

  1. Profile photo of fancylad
    fancylad Male 30-39
    18830 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 2:18 pm
    Link: Elizabeth Warren on Debt Crisis, Fair Taxation - The old gal makes some interesting point, eh I-A-B?
  2. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 2:35 pm
    meh..
  3. Profile photo of M_Archer
    M_Archer Male 18-29
    525 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 2:37 pm
    Fair Taxation: an oxymoron if I`ve ever heard one...
  4. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    Stupid.
  5. Profile photo of Subushie
    Subushie Male 18-29
    1646 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:01 pm
    I like her spunk. She has many points; but they are all obvious, when she proposes a plan on WHAT to do, then I`ll listen.
  6. Profile photo of lyonartime
    lyonartime Male 18-29
    260 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:04 pm
    @auburnjunky

    *(spoken in the voice of a baptist preacher)*

    And thus, the entirety of her argument was laid waste to, shattered irrevocably by an intellect so grand that it can brush aside the entirety of a political doctrine with but a single word, spoken from the blessed lips of a TRUE genius:
    "stupid."
  7. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:12 pm
    I love this woman because she scares the crap outta repulicons.
  8. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3234 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:16 pm
    I see her point, but she makes it sound like the factory owner doesn`t pay his portion for the roads that everyone uses.

    Why should he pay more for public commodities than the next guy? I`m not talking total, but percentage. It`s not like the entire police force is standing guard outside his factory. Plus he probably has his own private security to watch the place, that he pays out of his pocket.

    On the education part, can we really blame him for using a resource that is readily available?

    And he is setting a chunk on for the next kid. He is hiring that next kid, which would cut into his profit.
  9. Profile photo of Baelzar
    Baelzar Male 40-49
    1399 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:32 pm
    Great! So...how much is enough? What`s the "fair share" that the factory owner owes?

    I have a feeling, the answer is always "MORE."
  10. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:54 pm
    Democrats have yet to meet a tax they don`t like, unless of course it was a tax on the big union thugs that vote for them.
  11. Profile photo of mvangild
    mvangild Male 30-39
    527 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:54 pm
    I like her; she`s smart. However, by taxing the hell out of the businesses, we risk losing more jobs to China, Mexico, Thailand, etc. They`re in it for the money, not trying to better everyone else. One company I used to work for moved their entire engineering organization to Mexico, moved the people to El Paso (or Laredo, I can`t remember which), and had them cross the border to get to work every day. The talk of "social contract" is lost on them because it is in the interest (albeit short-term) of the stockholders to move where the tax system isn`t so restrictive, and allows for a better profit. Tax the rich, fine. But cut slack to the businesses that hire, and cut more slack the more people they hire. That increases your tax base, puts more people to work, and generates cash flow.
  12. Profile photo of bliznik
    bliznik Male 30-39
    838 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:58 pm
    @DuckBoy87, umm, YES, that is EXACTLY what she is saying. There are plenty of companies that pay ZERO taxes because they "claim" losses or depreciation and show zero profit on paper even though they stash away $$$ in the bank. I actually attended a deposition once where a company owner said that he used a specific accountant b/c he is well-known for "balancing" the profits of a company against losses so that his company NEVER has to pay any taxes. Those tax loopholes should be closed.

    Unfortunately, the Republican PR machine has categorized "closing tax loopholes" to be synonymous with a "tax hike."
  13. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 3:59 pm
    Fine. I will elaborate:

    What Duckboy said.

    What Crakr said.

    What mvangild said.

    I can`t be bothered to elaborate on liberal cronies. Thank God you`ll all be gone in a year.
  14. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:01 pm
    Yeah democrats like to tax so the nation can afford republicans.
  15. Profile photo of McDuff73
    McDuff73 Male 30-39
    870 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    Whats wrong with asking a millionaire to pay more?
    they can afford it!
  16. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3234 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    blink, maybe I misspoke. What should have put down was that she makes it sound like every business owner does that. I`m sure that there are business owners who "play by the rules" (rules that are entirely made up). Yes, those that lie in the books should be reprimanded, for a lack of a better term, but not every business owner should suffer for those more "creative" than them.

    Change the law and the practice, don`t punish the successful.
  17. Profile photo of paperduck
    paperduck Male 18-29
    1745 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    taxing the rich isn`t exactly the answer, because they will just pass the extra cost along to consumers anyway.
  18. Profile photo of scheckydamon
    scheckydamon Male 60-69
    704 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:42 pm
    Fair Tax..... End Of Line
  19. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2765 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 4:42 pm
    How about we don`t spend money we don`t have?

    Can we turn the government over to an annoying debt collection agency?
  20. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 5:01 pm
    "by taxing the hell out of the businesses, we risk losing more jobs to China, Mexico, Thailand, etc."

    Read. Raising taxes, and "taxing the hell out of" are different.

    Excessive taxation is economically damaging.

    Falling for the notion that any taxation is excessive taxation, is however silly, and is equally damaging.

    Lets make it simple: You know that deficit we care about? Romney is happy to add ~$7 trillion to it, by removing taxes.

    How do you think that is for the economy?
  21. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 5:12 pm
    "Fair Tax..... End Of Line"

    Sure, tax wealth equally. That`d be fair. Or are you talking about "Fair tax" (C)(TM) which is basically a slogan attached to an economic principle to make it more palatable?

    Seriously, the fair tax applies consumption.
    To the bottom 20% on 180% of their income goes on consumption. (The poorest people consume more than they earn).

    To the top 20%, 47% of their wealth goes on consumption.

    You create a caste system, you destroy the middle and lower classes, you make it harder for anyone to be upwardly mobile.

    You also cripple consumption, and disrupt your own economy to boot.
  22. Profile photo of OutWest
    OutWest Male 50-59
    546 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 5:36 pm
    Same liberal clap trap I`ve heard since the 60`s.

    Now add the opposite far right, and you can see why stuff is all messed up.

    Somewhere in the middle of the two is where we need to be. So that a government by the people and for the people is reached. Not her far left or their far right ideologies.

  23. Profile photo of M_Archer
    M_Archer Male 18-29
    525 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 5:39 pm
    OutWest, that`s the Golden Mean fallacy.

    The first problem is that the government thinks that it has the right to the money earned by other men, as if that money belongs to the government and not the producers.
  24. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 5:48 pm
    Yeah we wouldn`t want to be like Canada.
  25. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 6:03 pm
    That was basically an argument that there must *be* taxes, (which is true for more reasons than she said), not what those taxes should be set to.
  26. Profile photo of FartSmeller
    FartSmeller Male 50-59
    33 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 6:46 pm
    Actually, only half of income earners pay taxes, and if you include all those who are dependents it`s even a smaller fraction of the population who pay for roads, schools, police, etc. in the first place.

    So maybe we need to raise taxes on the poor so that they actually begin to pay for a) Their education. b) The need for police to keep them under control. c) All the public services they use like roads, sidewalks, police, garbage collection, etc.

    Plus Beth is one stupid bitch for not understanding that the people who benefit most from roads, school, police, etc. are not the rich. All those trucks on the road delivering food, gas, etc. are NOT delivering consumables that the rich utilize. The vast majority of it goes to the poor and middle classes. So it is they who benefit the most from it.
  27. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 6:52 pm

    Average tax
    30% for middle class
    20% for rich

    And there`s a problem with increasing tax on the rich why?

    Oh, that`s right, because 47% of the people pay no income tax at all. "Broaden the tax base" as Perry/Romney/Bachman say. Of course, those 47% earn less than 20K a year but whether they can afford a tax is really not the point, is it.
  28. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Jobs went overseas because the U.S. does not impose tarifs. Other countries, in order to keep jobs at home, tax imported goods which keeps locally produced products competative. The U.S. not only does not do that, we send foreign aid to the countries taking the jobs.

    Business will always go with cheeper labor. Either overseas or hiring illegals as long as the government allows it. You want to stop jobs going over seas the gov`ment has to make it unprofitable to do so.

    Ah, but then it`s those very corporations who purchased the politicians so that ain`t gonna happen.
  29. Profile photo of gbrzeatetee
    gbrzeatetee Male 30-39
    174 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 7:59 pm
    @FartSmeller: you`re a retard who`s completely missed the point. Now go back to watching OReilly. Btw, have you heard about those gays in the military?
  30. Profile photo of mvangild
    mvangild Male 30-39
    527 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:16 pm
    Baalthazaq, I`m not keen on that article. It asserts that the tax rate is low because the tax revenue divided by the GDP is low, therefore the tax rate is low. There are a number of reasons why the comparison between the last few years and past years fails, mostly due to the decreased revenue due to unusually high unemployment, lack of capital gains taxes (thanks to the stock market crash), and increased GDP due to the economic stimulus package. He then goes on to assert that the statutory tax rate is manipulated to show that corporate tax rates are higher than what they are. Okay, fine, so what are the statutory tax rates of these other countries listed in his list? He then says that the statutory corporate tax rate is high, but that isn`t relevant. Why not? Finally, the list of countries listed don`t include the countries that the U.S. is losing jobs to, such as Mexico or China. (cont`d)
  31. Profile photo of mvangild
    mvangild Male 30-39
    527 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:27 pm
    Actually, it`ll be a while before I continue, I want to find some data to support my argument first.
  32. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3234 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:37 pm
    Though I completely agree with what you said Gerry, but the fact is that we should be thinking more about a global economy rather than "local" economy.

    No one country could take care of itself by itself. The lack of tariffs is why we have lower prices.

    Sugar from Brazil should be cheaper than corn in America but because of subsidies on corn and tariffs on sugar, corn syrup is used more than sugar.
  33. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:48 pm
    Everyone pay 18%, period, get rid of loopholes, get rid of deductions, and everything will be fine.
  34. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:52 pm
    "we should be thinking more about a global economy rather than "local" economy"
    A global economy cannot work without a global leader. Look at the European Union. They merged their economies but in a leaderless format and you see the mess they are in. Broke countries are dragging prosperous ones down with them.

    We cannot aid or help any countries if our own is broke. 47% of workers in the U.S. don`t pay income tax because they earn less than 20K per year. In other words, all most half the working adults are earning a poverty wage. How can you build a prosperous country on that? You can`t. You can however take us back 150 years to when it was just 2 classes...the super rich and the super poor.
  35. Profile photo of mvangild
    mvangild Male 30-39
    527 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 8:53 pm
    Gerry, yeah, income tax is lower on the rich, but that`s usually because it`s made up in capital gains taxes. In 2009, when the stock market took a dive from 12,000 down to around 8,000, capital gains were fairly nonexistent.

    Your second post, I pretty much agree with. As long as it is profitable to set up shop outside of this country, corporations will do so. The scary part of increasing tariffs is the cost can be passed onto the consumer, which reduces disposable income. This could in turn spark some inflation.

    Honestly, increasing tariffs should have been done while we were on our bubble. Now, with serious unemployment and the threat of an economic downturn, it may have unintended consequences. It`s not a bad idea, but one that probably needs to be considered further.
  36. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3234 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 9:16 pm
    Make a global leader(s). A representative from each in the part, one who actually has education in economics. It doesn`t even have to be the entirety of the globe, it could start off as a portion of the globe that will evolve into a single entity.

    I`ll admit that I`m not much of the "How to" guy but rather the idea guy, so don`t take that last paragraph too serious.

    But what I mean is countries can artificially rise and lower the value of their currency, and stopping that would help overall. And like it or not, we are at the beginning stages of a world economy and have been for a while. When information can travel across the globe in a matter of seconds, and the growth of online businesses, any business is forced to compete globally.

    Buying textbooks from Amazon is cheaper than buying from the campus bookstore, for example.
  37. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3234 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 9:22 pm
    I`ll disagree with you on your second half, as last year I made $12.5k last year working a part-time job while also being a college student, but paid $500 in taxes come tax season.

    Yeah it sucks, but minimum wage jobs aren`t for getting rich quick. They are unskilled work usually to tie over for students and those who lost a job and are trying to get back on their feet. In my opinion, the recent minimum wage hike was one of the worst things that happened to the economy. Suddenly unskilled work became worth just as much as low skilled work, but the low skilled workers didn`t get the raise, or at least that`s what happened in my area. Though we didn`t get hit as hard during this recession because my area already was in an economical wasteland.
  38. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 9:32 pm
    The old gal makes some interesting point, eh I-A-B?
    No, she doesn`t. It`s just a bunch of tired old socialist tripe. In fact, they guy building the factory has already paid, and will continue to pay, a MUCH larger share of the cost of the roads, police, fire protection, etc., than anyone who will ever work there. They should all get down on their knees and thank him, not bitch about how he should be paying more for the `privilege` of providing them with jobs and products.
  39. Profile photo of manorrd
    manorrd Male 30-39
    2372 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 9:54 pm
    Maybe she should ask Gibson Guitars about bands of marauders that show up at your factory and seize everything in sight.
  40. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 9:57 pm

    mvangild ~ I`m agreeing tarrifs aren`t the solution. I was pointing out how the U.S. specifically engineered their own economic demise by refusing to protect itself. It was suicide.

    There is no magic pill. No one solution that will magically make it all go away. Start with some easy, low tarrifs. Give companies warning so they can plan their reactions ... manufacturing in this country. Also fix the taxes. Also stop all this damn spending. And many other things are needed.
  41. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 10:02 pm
    There is no magic pill. No one solution that will magically make it all go away.
    Sure there is, Gerry. It`s called freedom. Maybe one day we`ll get it back. Not, however, till we get rid of this SCOAMF.
  42. Profile photo of FartSmeller
    FartSmeller Male 50-59
    33 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 10:21 pm
    gbrzeatetee,

    There were gays in the military before I was born. What`s wrong with having them defend the country like the rest of us. Heck if someone hates gays the first place they should want them is on the front lines as cannon fodder.

    Of course, like you, most gay haters are irrational fools.
  43. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 10:39 pm

    "freedom" ?

    Freedom isn`t gonna lower your taxes.
    Freedom isn`t going to make cheep labor in Taiwan less appealing to manufacturers.
    Freedom is a social issue, not an economic one.

    But yes, I`d like to see the freedoms we had when I was 20 restored.
  44. Profile photo of FartSmeller
    FartSmeller Male 50-59
    33 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 10:46 pm
    Gerry1of1,

    Europe isn`t in trouble because they didn`t have a single leader. That`s just plain silly. Their problem is that you can`t have a credit based currency with multiple independent creditors. The Eurosceptics understood this from the start but were called "monetary quacks". They have been proven correct.

    This entire economic mess has been caused by our various governments following Keynesian economics and other leftist fantasies.

    If they recriminalized fractional reserve banking then banks would be forced to sell securities (bonds) with maturities that matched lender to borrower. Currently they borrow short and lend long, which will always fail in the end with the short term lender wants their money, NOW. That`s what a bank run is. That is what we are experiencing right now, fractional reserve deflation. Stupidly the government thinks they can solve that problem by printing fiat currency and spending it. No that does not re
  45. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 11:34 pm

    lack of leadership is silly?
    But an joint economy with no direction is good... huh?
    EVERYTHING requires leadership. Be it a small company, a large banking institution, or government social programs.
    And I didn`t specify a single leader... A group/party/government...whatever you want to call it...someone stearing the ship.
  46. Profile photo of intrigid
    intrigid Male 18-29
    914 posts
    September 22, 2011 at 11:58 pm
    In her last point, she was basically making a moral argument about distribution of wealth. I respect her intentions and her desire to help get more wealth to the poor, making them less poor, which is admirable.

    Here`s something she doesn`t seem to understand. Successful entrepreneurs are already paying a lot of taxes. Marginal tax rates in the US are higher for high income earners. I believe 35% for the top bracket. Not every business in the US is an Apple or Starbucks or some kind of license to print money. Not by a long shot.

    If you increase corporate taxes, even for a business that is already profitable, what you`re doing is changing the risk/reward balance. This means that businesses will have to be more selective on who they hire to ensure profitability. This can also have a discouraging effect on small businesses that haven`t reached the top tax brackets.

    Basically, there`s no point in taxing corporations at all. They`re just going to pass it on to ever
  47. Profile photo of intrigid
    intrigid Male 18-29
    914 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 12:00 am
    ... pass it on to everyone else. The best type of tax code is one that focuses heavily on sales taxes instead of business and income taxes. This fosters a society of productivity, savings, and underconsumption.
  48. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 12:02 am
    The greatest coup the right-wing conservatives ever pulled was convincing the lower-class working man that they were working for him. All the while giving cash breaks to the dude with the yacht.
  49. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 3:06 am
    davymid: Why don`t you go check on Obama`s largest contributors in 2008, they are some the biggest banks and brokerages. Guess who Rahm Emanuel doled out the majority of the TARP funds to ? Answer, those same banks that contributed to Obama.

    If you call that `democrats being for the working man` then you`re really screwed up in the head. They might back the union thugs, but that`s because they are essential to the machine politics of the metropolitan areas.
  50. Profile photo of Klamz
    Klamz Male 18-29
    689 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 4:11 am
    It`s sad this even needs to be said.
  51. Profile photo of pmarren
    pmarren Male 40-49
    4575 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 6:54 am
    I`d tap it.
  52. Profile photo of manorrd
    manorrd Male 30-39
    2372 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 7:39 am
    This whole thing screams of:

    "You wanna know whose fault it is that things are tough? Bush! Bush and rich people, like that fat-cat factory owner raking it in and not paying his fair share."

    I don`t agree with her simplistic point of view for a minute.
  53. Profile photo of ledzeppeloyd
    ledzeppeloyd Male 18-29
    2385 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 8:22 am
    lets give common sense a try
  54. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 8:31 am
    Screw the senate. ELIZABETH WARREN FOR PRESIDENT!
  55. Profile photo of Mrpoo
    Mrpoo Male 70 & Over
    141 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 8:48 am
    I agree with her simplistic point of view because it`s completely valid.

    When has `fair` ever been debatable?
  56. Profile photo of simim23
    simim23 Female 18-29
    1427 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 9:29 am
    "I`d tap it."

    You can`t tap it. You`ve clearly stated that you hate pussy.
  57. Profile photo of mcboozerilla
    mcboozerilla Male 30-39
    646 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 10:07 am
    She`s 100% correct.
  58. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    596 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 11:25 am
    "You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for????" And the rest of her comments. Did everyone`s taxers pay for those roads. Why should the builder of the factory pay "extra" taxes?

    Class warefare.
  59. Profile photo of zionred
    zionred Male 30-39
    44 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 2:30 pm
    Marxism on display for all.
  60. Profile photo of Lameworld
    Lameworld Male 18-29
    51 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 2:40 pm
    @Dong007

    Ignorant.......
  61. Profile photo of GasMaskKid
    GasMaskKid Male 18-29
    694 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 4:05 pm
    What the hell is this class warfare poo?
  62. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36653 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 7:47 pm
    "What the hell is this class warfare poo? "
    It`s a smoke screen. A diversion.
    Call it something negative to put people on the defensive
    or to make it sound descriminatory. If they said "Pay a fair tax"
    no one would hate the idea.

    Give`m the old Razzle Dazzle
  63. Profile photo of FartSmeller
    FartSmeller Male 50-59
    33 posts
    September 23, 2011 at 11:34 pm
    No wonder this #$%^& named Warren wants to raise taxes. She`s dipped her beak int TARP money to the tune of $192,722. She must be one of those jobs Obama saved.

    Oh, and for those who are math challenged and yet call their superiors stupid: Go do a search of the Forbes web site for the article by Peter Ferrara titled "Correcting President Obama`s Myriad Tax Fallacies"

    It`s applicable to Warren`s idiocy too.
  64. Profile photo of DJHeight5
    DJHeight5 Male 18-29
    25 posts
    September 24, 2011 at 12:54 pm
    "So maybe we need to raise taxes on the poor so that they actually begin to pay for a) Their education. b) The need for police to keep them under control. c) All the public services they use like roads, sidewalks, police, garbage collection, etc."

    You`re an idiot. The taxes on the middle and lower class are already higher than those of the upper-class. I paid for my education, I pay for police to keep your self-important ass from getting killed, and I pay for the services I use. I also pay for the services I don`t use like Medicaid and Welfare. I can only hope you were being sarcastic, because if you weren`t you made it clear to everyone here that you have as much of an idea about how the world works as Sarah Palin or Rick Perry.

Leave a Reply