OK, explain this to me like I'm a complete idiot because I don't get it.

[HughBeaumont]

Republicans are 100% dead against taxing the rich, right? "Can't help the wage earner by hurting the wage payer" and all that, RIGHT?

Their logic is, if I'm reading guys like Chip Reid correctly, that if you raise taxes on the wealthy and the businesses they run, that will lead to them not hire since they'll supposedly have less capital to work with and they "aren't just gonna EAT it" (a whopper of a fallacy since PROFITS are taxed and EXPENSES are deducted); but if you lower their taxes, that will lead to them to put more into their businesses and create jobs (that is, if you took the monorail to Fantasyland. Reality dictates otherwise).

Republicans are pretty much against taxing everyone else also, right? "MY gunz, MY moneh, MY Freedums" and all that, right? That's why all of these so-called "Tea Parties for Taxophobes" are happening, right? So they can shift blame for this economic debacle from themselves for VOTING for Reagan or the two Bewshs or Ron Paul and supporting unbridled low-tax corporatism to "lazy deadbeats" and "Tax-n-Spendocrats", right? Nice little convenience there. Wonder where these people were when Republicans were genuinely wasting their tax money on vanity wars, AIG exec junkets or rich people's lotteries?

Republicans are also against ending Bewsh's vanity wars, which have proven to be and still are, costly boondoggles designed to further siphon billions of tax dollars from our grandchildren's pockets on a monthly basis and more or less continue to be KBR's, Bechtol's and Halliburton's personal mints. Yet the Pentasewer still wants more and more tax booty to fund these useless occupations. This despite the fact people are losing jobs left and right at home and money isn't circulating because CEOs aren't stopping the firing, leaving their workers scared as hell. Yeah. Amazing.

So let me see if I got this right. If taxing the rich is bad for bidness, and we want to lower taxes on everyone else even further, and businesses aren't hiring despite having the lowest top tax bracket in 75 years, which results in money NOT circulating in the economy, and we've spiraled further and further into debt thanks to 28 years of Republicanomics and Republicans want to continue two wasteful wars all for the purpose of "finishin' the fight" . . .

WHERE did they honestly think the money would COME from to . . . you know . . . RUN THIS COUNTRY? WHERE? Seriously, I'm all ears.

Anybody got a ROAD map to this supposed revenue? Explain this to me like I'm a complete IDIOT because I don't get it.

In their lollipop world of money trees, debt fairies, homes filled with good Republican small business owners and two Hummers in each driveway, where does the money COME from to run the country?

Is that whole . . . "trickle down" thing going to happen "any day now" or do I have to wait a leeeetle bit longer?

I guess I'm asking for someone to do the impossible.

I'm asking you to THINK . . . like a REPUBLICAN.

[Ohio Joe]

1. Sorry

I really don't want to do that, it will hurt.

[aquart]

2. "Bewsh"? Any particular reason for that spelling?

[HughBeaumont]

5. 2:47 of this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcD57zxPb1k&feature=related

"President Bewsh! President Bewsh!" Irritating. Spine seeking. Made me want to brick the damned screen. Their ignorance cost this country BIG time.

[ooglymoogly]

22. Bewsh works for me...I guess its the hillbilly in me. nt

[Edweird]

3. "I'm asking you to THINK . . . like a REPUBLICAN." That is mutually exclusive.

You are asking the impossible.

[Cerridwen]

4. Um, Hugh, if you were a complete idiot,

it would make complete sense.

Ya either gotta jettison some brain cells or you're just going to have to live with the "mystery."

Sorry.


:hi:

[HughBeaumont]

6. Maybe I should have one of THEM explain it to me.

Mods, can you take a 1-day break and let a few of these clowns in our building . . . just so they can enlighten me? Then you can kick them out once they get too liquored up?

:rofl:

[Cerridwen]

8. Aw, hell. They just had the furniture cleaned. Don't invite 'em

back in to piss all over the place. Geez!

If you *do* decide to have one of "them" explain it to ya, you might want some "mood enhancing" drugs nearby. And plenty of aspirin. Those kinds of mental contortions can be damned painful to watch, much less to do.

:rofl:

[HughBeaumont]

26. Hey, I got the Woolite ready!

[Cerridwen]

28. Is that the industrial size?

:rofl:

[Believing Is Art]

7. Trying to find my copy of Atlas Shrugged . . .

I can't actually think like a Republican. I'm pretty sure that's because I think, in general.

To the best of my understanding, it's basically what you said. By cutting taxes on the wealthy, they will reinvest it in the economy. By doing so, the wealth will "trickle down" so that the lower classes are doing better. Since they are doing better, the government can collect more from them and that's where the revenue will come from. And by cutting "wasteful spending" (entitlement programs, infrastructure, etc.), the government will have more than enough.

This never made any sense to me because it seems to require an infinite source of capital in a world with a finite amount of resources. It also means that the wealthy can't be greedy. Obviously, the little Randian wet dream has failed.

My worry is, have we let them get away with too much already? It seems like they can't actually force them to lend or hire. We bail out the financial institutions, they hoard the money. The DOW still plunges. We bail out GM and Chrysler, they cut jobs (though the auto situation is more complicated than that, cutting jobs can't be the best answer). Without actually compelling the rich to invest in the domestic economy, will they refuse to do so out of pure spite? They've had lower tax rates and no accountability for so long that many of them have turned into spoiled children. Now that we're going to make them pay their share and lay down some rules, will they play along or will they throw a tantrum?

The government alone cannot fix the problems in the economy. But how can we make those who have benefited the most from this country start to give back to the people that got them to where they are today?

[HughBeaumont]

15. And I think that's what inspired this other journal entry . . .

. . . What needs to happen FIRST? And yes, I also am under the tongue-in-cheek impression that some of the upper echelon are tanking the economy because the Bewsh gravy train is over. Yes, they ARE acting like spoiled little brats, justifying their ridiculous pay with statements like "our kind of talent doesn't come cheap". Hell, pay ME a 1/4 of what they make. I'll ruin their company and be set for life in the process.

"It also means the wealthy can't be greedy".

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl: Yeah. Put a drug addict in an average Colombian cocaine warehouse and he'll be juuuuuuuuuust fine. Money, porn, caffeine, chocolate, abuse, cigarettes, the internet . . . addiction is addiction. Rand worshippers can pretend it ain't so all they want. In the immortal words of Rob Halford . .. "You got another think coming!"

[pacalo]

27. On corporations "reinvesting tax cuts on the economy"...

The corporation I worked at in the '70s-'80s (see my post below) gave back to the community through donations & time. Since the corporation was sold to another larger corporation, I haven't heard much about community projects, other than "Adopt-a-School", or news about financial contributions.

Those who believe the corporations' profits & tax cuts are being filtered into the community & toward employee satisfaction are living under a rock. The money -- & lots of it -- is going to the executives.

[HughBeaumont]

30. Even Robber Barons were more philanthropic than their modern counterparts are.

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2007/0318useconomics_easterbrook.aspx

Yet with the sainted exception of Warren Buffett and maybe Bill Gates, virtually all of them refuse to give any meaningful fraction of their wealth to the less fortunate—or even to give a decent fraction to such endeavors as art or medical research, which they'd benefit from.

Now subtract Buffett and his generous gift from the group, and the rest of them begin to look downright miserly, handing to others a mere $7 billion of a combined net worth of $584 billion—or just over 1%. Numbers from the philanthropy watch organization Giving USA show that Americans as a whole annually give away about 0.5% of their net worth. So, except for Buffett, society's top givers donate to others at only a tad higher rate than the population as a whole. That's, well, pathetic. And that's just counting top givers, not the super-rich who give away little or nothing.

Microsoft mogul Paul Allen, net worth $16 billion, gave away $53 million in 2006, according to Slate—one-third of 1% of his fortune. Software magnate Lawrence Ellison, net worth $20 billion, gave away $100 million—half of 1%. Pierre Omidyar, founder of EBay, net worth $7.7 billion, gave away $67 million—less than 1%. Nike tycoon Philip Knight, net worth $7.9 billion, gave away $105 million—slightly more than 1%.

(snip)

Converting to today's dollars, during his lifetime the industrialist Andrew Carnegie gave away $8 billion of his $10.3 billion net worth, or 78%, according to Carnegie Corp. figures. Suppose Gates followed suit: He would have to give away an additional $36 billion and go from being the world's richest man to exceeding Buffett as the world's greatest benefactor—and he would still have $17 billion. Conservatively invested, $17 billion would yield, after taxes, about $700 million a year for life. So Gates could show history-making generosity and still remain richer than Croesus. Instead, it's mine, mine, mine.

[ooglymoogly]

31. You still keep those old misanthropic Rand comic books

around when fuel and firewood are so expensive.They make good kindling; Shooting off the bluest of flames. Quite pretty really. Kinda like fireworks for their own sick, shallow headed, long awaited demise.

[Believing Is Art]

34. They made comic books?

Crazy! I tackled Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead for pure amusement and pop culture rapport. I was horrified to learn that a lot of people actually take that crap seriously and think we should model our society based on fiction. Those books need to come with a disclaimer.

[ooglymoogly]

35. No, not in the true sense of the genera.

I just call her simple headed books comic books because they are so funny.

[HughBeaumont]

37. Just like the people who believe we should model EVERYthing after The Bible

Who says words aren't powerful things? :)

[AntiFascist]

38. I'd like to know in what businesses they are investing the excess wealth...

more likely they are hoarding the wealth and buying up natural resources. This is where the real danger lies because once the wealthy few own all the resources, the rest of us become financial slaves.

[Believing Is Art]

39. The term is "serfs"

Right-wing policies would lead us back to a feudal society. It's hardly veiled at all. They complain about how highly the unions are paid and force them to accept lower wages as an agreement for bailing out Chrysler and GM. All in the name of "being competitive" with non-union foreign automakers. The next step will be accepting wages that are competitive with workers overseas . . .

[AntiFascist]

40. If we charged our own VAT tax on imports...

the only companies that could complain about increased taxes are those which are offshore and that employ foreign workers. Meanwhile, the domestic workforce becomes more competitive without any change in wages. :think: Oh, and this would also greatly increase the ability to payoff our huge national debt.

[ldf]

41. They've had lower tax rates and no accountability

for so long that many of them.....

believe it is an ENTITLEMENT!

whoda thunk?

their sense of entitlement proves them to be the corporate welfare queens that they really are (no offense to REAL queens, drag or royal) .

they should have to hold up in their gated communities and/or upper floor penthouses, and NEVER come out, for fear of meeting the little, angry people they have ripped off, who have finally taken up pitchforks, tar and feathers, and carrying rails......

[hack89]

9. Their argument is that it is not a zero sum game

What they argue is that a smaller percentage of a much bigger(and growing) pie is better than a larger percentage of a smaller (and static/shrinking) pie.

More companies, more workers all paying taxes is where the money to run the country comes from.


At least that is what my BIL says. ;)

[Hello_Kitty]

10. Free market pixie fairies will spread magic dust and that will run the country

That's about as good an explanation as you'll ever get from a freeper.

[ThomWV]

11. If the rich don't want to be taxed so heavily they shouldn't pay themselves so much.

[omega minimo]

12. They don't

"I'm asking you to THINK . . . like a REPUBLICAN." :think:



They slavishly enable the crimes of those above them in the pile who are holding all the money and some imaginary planet to live on after they ruin this one.


:hi: ETA

[SPedigrees]

13. the great repub party line (lie)

"Republicans are pretty much against taxing everyone else also, right? "MY gunz, MY moneh, MY Freedums" and all that, right?"

Wrong. That's just the line of bull they use to get joe redneck's vote. They sucker in their constituents, then tax the hell out of em to finance their wars.

[bluesmail]

14. NWO. They want one government ruling the World. New World Order eom

[yellerpup]

16. I think you're ON it, HughBeaumont.

Nobody need explain nothin' to you! K&R!

[napi21]

17. They really don't want gov't at all! They want private business to run

everything, they want to do away with SS, Welfare, education grants, gov't soonsored research, ALL OF IT! Remember, their core principal is "everyone is responsible for himself, and if you can't succeed or survive, that's YOUR FAULT!"

[HughBeaumont]

24. Ah yes, the "Privitization" dream.

More Conservative mantra that results in a Hindenburg joyride when applied to the real world. It's because it more or less assumes life will be perfect, the parties running things WON'T be greedy, corrupt and/or unethical, and great results/returns will happen each and every time.

Just think what would have happened if those assrockets were given the keys to the Social Security IOU. The Blackwater and ESS/Diebold follies were bad enough. That's too scary to even THINK about.

Yeah, I also love that whole "rugged individualist" canard. You know, because freepers don't drive on sissy paved roads. Or use libraries. Or go to school. Or receive or send mail. Or "support our troops". Or use busses, planes, trains, hospitals, parks, social security, running water, etc. They think when they put their garbage out, it magically disappears to some far away land, or when they flush their ideas, it turns into vapor after the pipes dispense of it. They think meat just "comes" to you all inspected, unmoldy and untainted.

If they were really these "self-made, stay outta my bidness" people, they'd be cave hermits. Idiots.

[Mike 03]

18. Kick and Rec. This is a great post because it really lays bare the techniques used by the

republicans to attempt to sour the public on the stimulus plan.

All of their reasons are bullshit. They will tell us that taxing corporations will only make them outsource jobs, ignoring the provision in the plan that rewards companies for not outsourcing, and on and on and on...

The bottom line is that there is no free lunch. Taxes serve a purpose. I've called 911 a half dozen times and also had firefighters put out a fire in my house that saved everything my wife and I owned. To me, that right there is worth paying taxes for.

My niece's education is worth paying taxes for, and it's also worth paying taxes to feed breakfast and lunch to her friends who cannot afford much food right now.

[Vinca]

19. I call it the school of Flaming Pie Economics.

Because apparently the money to run the country will come out of the sky on a flaming pie.

[surrealAmerican]

20. Republicans are afraid to tell you where they expect the money to come from...

... because they expect it to come from the poor. In their rose-colored world, the wealthy don't pay taxes. They hire poor people to do their work, at very low wages. These low-wage workers are the ones who pay taxes. Since welfare, food stamps, social security, etc. no longer exist, the poor need to take whatever work they can find. Should they become unable to work, they die.

[Mollis]

21. ooo K&R

excellent questions that I would love the repubs I live around to answer.

[Festivito]

23. They're not 100% against taxing the rich, just mostly.

Defense, police, and judges. (NOTE: Not justice, judges)

That SS stuff, nope. They don't need it, so neither should you. BUT, if YOU pay for it, you can have it.

That Welfare, nope. Same reason.

So, not on their dollar. But, you can help support the military. Although, they'd probably pay more in taxes if it went directly to the military, police, and judges. Of course then they'd want more control over those decisions, and finally over how we control elections, since it is their money being spent.

Sounds so good.

Lastly, they need to get the little people to spend less, so they can pay them less for the same work. That way they can invest more in order to increase the overall economy that, ahem, flows into their pockets.

It's all good.

[pacalo]

25. Once upon a time I believed that corporate tax cuts would filter down to the employees.

They actually did filter down generously at a corporation I used to work for: annual 8-10 percent cost-of-living raises (which were later reduced, but before the corporation was sold, evolved into yearly bonuses based on salary), free turkeys/hams at Thanksgiving, Christmas bonuses, annual family picnics/Las Vegas nights.

Every one of those perks were taken away. The profits, enhanced with huge tax cuts, now go to the executives. Period. Those idiots who are locked in a time warp just haven't noticed the changes.

[hfojvt]

29. yew shore don't get it a tall

Why the hail do yew think the gubmint needs this revenoo?

Check this out.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/95

social security payments - 457.7*
disability - 91.2*
railroad retirement - 5.6
military retirement - 41.1
civil service retirement - 54.8
veterans benefits - 31.0
unemployment compensation - 31.9 *
medicare - 375.6*
schip - 5.5 *
medicaid - 180.6 *
veterans medical - 24.4
other medical - 19.9*
assistance to students - 51.7*
housing assistance - 32.1 *
food stamps and other - 53.8 *
SSI - 34.3 *
TANF - 20.9 *
liheap - 2.6 *
EITC - 36.2*
other assistance - 31.1 *

Right there is 1.425 trillion in gubmint waste. Get rid of all that waste and then the economy will take off and provide jobs - for everybody who really wants a job, that is.

You know how you can tell if somebody wants a job? They will work their a$$ off for $2 an hour just like they did in the 1820s. That's what made this country great - hard work.

[Prophet 451]

32. It's fairly simple really

I talk to Republicans all the time and the remaining Republican base are made up primarily of 3 groups:
1) Rich people and those who want to be rich. These guys are pretty obvious.
2) Anti-government kooks. Essentially, this is a mass of people like that weird dude at the bar who thinks the guv'mint are spying on his fillings. Backyard anarchists and neighbourhood confederacies, you can include virtually all libertarians in here.
3) Religious fanatics. Now, don't make the mistake of thinking their religion is Christianity, it's not. Their religion is right-wing Republicanism; they worship Reagan (very, very nearly literally), think W was a godsend, believe everythign Rush tells them to and probably eat paint chips.

Scattered among there are a goodly portion of old-fashioned racists, new style racists, America First nativists, outright fascists and Joe the Plumber (who seems to be all four). Those groups are actually pretty different and disagree on many things. About the only think they agree on is tax cuts. I mean, no-one enjoys paying taxes (including me) but these guys are pathological about it.

The other part of it is that they think Obama is an illegitimate president. No, not the citizen crap (although some of them think that too) but that the public has no right to elect a Democrat and if they do, everything he does is illegitimate and must be blocked. They'll try to impeach him on the first pretext they can find and drum up any scandal going. David Brock described the mindset pretty well in Blinded By The Right.

[GeorgeGist]

33. As long as economics remains a competitive game ...

the rich will win.

[Iggo]

36. I can tell you...

...a couple of local business owners I've spoken to would rather have customers than tax breaks. (Truth be told, they'd rather have both. They're not complete idiots...lol.) But low taxes or no taxes, they're going under unless they can get customers back into their stores.

Not sure if that works across the board. Just something interesting I heard.