What's new

CEO raises minimum wage to $70000, takes $70000 wage himself until profits are met.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 848
  • Start date Start date
Our founders expected tariff proceeds to fund the federal government. It looked good, since prior to the Rev the Brits were charging and keeping the tariffs. Now, our economy was going to get the boost from keeping this money right here, and spent here.

The plan did prove out, I think until about the Civil War at least but maybe all the way up to the Income Tax and the Federal Reserve. Probably we should go back and try it again.


The modern term for protectionism is Value Added Tax. I suppose if they changed the terminology to Spend It Local Tax you **** kickers would leach onto it :)

The rest of the world understands the value of keep it at home; we are against anything called tax. Not that you're a conservative or anything, but conservatives need to start looking at these issues in a conservative light again like Reagan did, and stop demonizing anything government as bad bad tisk tisk. USE government for what you want.


When benefit outweighs the $3.09 trillion drain over ten years, we could look at that. I'm not convinced in the slightest that in the grand scale of a country, the benefits outweigh what we could have been spending on teachers, police, firefighters, etc.

You're talking $3.09 trillion (most likely a highly debatable number that's at least halved at the start, but I'm not the type to tirade for pages about links and sources and the like) with shock factor value. First off, it's over TEN YEARS, which means $300 billion per year. That's essentially nothing in an economy with $55 trillion worth of wealth, and that's going off the post-depression high to give you the maximum benefit of the doubt. It is five thousandths of our wealth. That's pretty damn meaningless.

Why aren't you focusing on tax cheating by the common man? Why is it only the rich? If we all paid just $100 more per year we could pay for just about everyone who wants to to go to college. Things are cheap when you have a lot of ants working for you. Instead, we're all convinced the middle class is overtaxed to death, the rich are getting richer, and satan is about to break his chains.

Taxes on teh "middle class" are so disgustingly low for what we expect in return. The benefits we could get from raising rates just slightly on the common man are insane. George W. Bush ****ed us on the revenue side of the equation.
 
...would be a near-total reversal, at this point. I'm guessing the list of things that we get protectionist about is quite small.

Well, IMO, we'd do better than the Income Tax we have with a national sales tax, or a flat tax with no special breaks. And what with the EIC that makes "income tax" a tool for wealth redistribution. And with a lot of global cartel corporates, there is literally no such thing as an "American" company. . . . .

The idea doesn't look to me like a "protectionist" racket. It's a sales tax imposed at what crosses our borders, and we could tax exports the same way, if we wanted.

Clearly, it's an idea for a smaller government.
 
Dalamaintnuthin wants to play some more? I'm bored, why not.

Always fun.



You asked for solutions.

So you randomly chose a garbage one that you could easily refute. My my, the brilliance!



Do you have a clue what EITR is? Even Obama and the left in this country agrees our developed world leading EITR is too high.

Wait, am I proposing to raise the EITR? Reading comprehension, señor.




I didn't expect you to understand or even attempt to think through the global economic implications of a more competitive America. When you grow up a little and widen your focus you might return back to that thought experiment.

You're incredibly naïve. Corporate America isn't sequestering it's economic viability with its high tax-rates-- it's simply exploiting every tax-evading loophole to maintain its profit-generation.





I didn't use Japan as an example of a different health care system that the US could emulate. Your attempt to derail failed.

Wrong. You cited a problem of the Japanese health-care system that was crippling a decade ago-- since then, many efforts have and continue to attempt to fix it.



Define "justly", and while you're at it explain away the never ending waiting lines that virtually every country but the US rants about.

Every country complains about, yet every country refuses to adopt a US-liek system. Why? A) nations have curtailed wait times (Japan, Germany) while still providing universal coverage; B) most people would rather offer free health-care than cause humongous portions of its citizens to file for bankruptcy due to medical bills.





Our effective taxes on the rich are as high as Canada's and plenty other G20 nations. If you add in corporate double taxation they are much higher. We also just raised taxes on investment income by 50% and are yet to calculate what the higher effective tax rate will be.

Two words: tax evasion

We spend a trillion USD per year on millitary and yet we still manage to provide better healthcare to our citizens than wasteful countries like yours who would rather see people die of curable disease than increase health care spending.

Better healthcare to the minority of citizens that have access to it*** Only time your country ramps up spending on a health care technology is when there is an economic benefit to be drawn by it. Live by the dollar, die by the dollar. What a corrupt, socially out-of-touch nation you live in.


Stop the demagoguery and start thinking critically.

Likewise.

Our tax as a % of GDP is low because we're more productive, not because we don't tax enough. I suppose we could retard our economy and turn it into a European **** hole until GDP shrinks enough that taxes are high enough to please you leftist ideologues.

More like please the millions of citizens in your nations that your government is failing to support. An embarrassment.

Also, as has been pointed out to you ad nauseum (hey that's fun throwing in debate 101 buzz words!), comparing the US to minature states like Denmark is absurd. Excluding them takes away from your narrow minded, monolithic views that are out of touch with reality.

As has been pointed out by many social scientists, the practice used by many neoconservative Americans that "______ (nation) is not America therefore we have nothing to learn from them" is stupid, and will eventually lead to the demise of the United States if this attitude does not change. Also, if you go through this thread you will realize that I have constantly referred to Japan & Germany as examples-- which if you consider a miniature state, then you're a fool.
 
You're talking $3.09 trillion (most likely a highly debatable number that's at least halved at the start, but I'm not the type to tirade for pages about links and sources and the like) with shock factor value. First off, it's over TEN YEARS, which means $300 billion per year. That's essentially nothing in an economy with $55 trillion worth of wealth, and that's going off the post-depression high to give you the maximum benefit of the doubt. It is five thousandths of our wealth. That's pretty damn meaningless.



Why aren't you focusing on tax cheating by the common man? Why is it only the rich? If we all paid just $100 more per year we could pay for just about everyone who wants to to go to college. Things are cheap when you have a lot of ants working for you. Instead, we're all convinced the middle class is overtaxed to death, the rich are getting richer, and satan is about to break his chains.

Taxes on teh "middle class" are so disgustingly low for what we expect in return. The benefits we could get from raising rates just slightly on the common man are insane. George W. Bush ****ed us on the revenue side of the equation.

Franklin-logic: where 300 billion dollars is considered 'essentially nothing', and then violently opposes any enforcement/raise of taxation towards companies that most certainly can afford it. The notion that having 300 billion a year extra is meaningless, and couldn't be allocated to address a societal need is simply moronic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Free health care is a misnomer. Now that I am in Germany >40% of my check goes to social insurances of one kind or another, right off the top.
 

wayne.gif
 
I always love it when someone throws in a "fact" that is so misbegotten that they blow up their entire argument. A real common one is the "sh*th*le" that European countries are. What a great way to demonstrate that you are completely blinded to reality. Europe has gorgeous countries with happier peeps and an overall better standard of living, at least until Wallstreet raped them. Go visit Paris and London and Rome and Nice and come back to tell us what poopy-wholes they are.
 
I always love it when someone throws in a "fact" that is so misbegotten that they blow up their entire argument. A real common one is the "sh*th*le" that European countries are. What a great way to demonstrate that you are completely blinded to reality. Europe has gorgeous countries with happier peeps and an overall better standard of living, at least until Wallstreet raped them. Go visit Paris and London and Rome and Nice and come back to tell us what poopy-wholes they are.

When was the last time you had to scrape the ice out of your refrigerator and freezer?

I have done it at least every 2-3 weeks since we have been in Germany.

Oh and do you have a refrigerator that will hold a couple gallons of milk? We don't, and ours is one of the bigger ones I have seen here.

Do you enjoy air conditioning, either in a home, public building, or car? We don't. Can't find it here. Anywhere.

Do you like your free refills at a restaurant? Can't find that here either.

How about extra condiments? Better be prepared to pay.

Ever paid a surcharge to pay a fee? Yep, stacked fees, welcome to Europe.

Yeah, it is the most wonderful place on the planet, because it is so perfect. Or something.
 
Franklin-logic: where 300 billion dollars is considered 'essentially nothing', and then violently opposes any enforcement/raise of taxation towards companies that most certainly can afford it. The notion that having 300 billion a year extra is meaningless, and couldn't be allocated to address a societal need is simply moronic.

More demagoguery from biggest ideologue tard on the forum. Has Thriller Jr. made a single salient point in this thread?

I'll never get the Dalamon/Thriller/Pearl Watson types.
 
Back
Top