porky88
14 years ago

I have no problem with unions.

I have a serious problem with taxes.

If people want to combine to get more bargaining power, that's just fine with me. If once combined, they want to try to use that bargaining power to get bigger and bigger slices of the pie they share with their employers and their employers' customers, that's fine with me, too.

I don't think fighting over pies is a sound business model, but that's neither here nor there. What other people do with their pies is their choice to make, not mine. Union, no union, labor unrest, no labor unrest, blah blah blah. If people want to make their sandbox a war zone, fine with me. It's their sandbox.

What I object to is them fighting over a pie that neither of the sides pay for. I don't believe people are entitled to take tax dollars just because they want bigger slices of pie.

Oh, yes, since someone asked this, albeit rhetorically, I do favor tax cuts for "the rich". Their money is neither mine nor yours. We aren't entitled to it, any more than we're entitled to the money of the poor.

I'd rather be richer than I am. But just because people like Paris Hilton or Donald Trump or the last lottery winner lucked into having a crapload more wealth than me without "working" for it, doesn't mean I'm entitled to share their wealth.

If they want to spend their unearned wealth on trivial stuff, on hundred-dollar Italian underwear and silk toilet paper and solid gold doorknobs...well, that may be all sorts of disgusting to me. But its still their wealth.

And if they want to turn around and pay their employees minimum wage, well, yes, they're scumbags as well as frivolous twits.

But it is still their wealth. Not mine. Not yours.

Just because we're in the majority, and the rich scumbag frivolous twits are in the minority, doesn't make their wealth ours to take.

The problem is not that politicians cut taxes to the rich too much. The only problem is that there is not a politician alive who is willing to make big enough tax cuts.

"Wade" wrote:



How big of a tax cut should they get?

Should they get one during a time of War?

We've been at war for about 10 years now and our defense spending is out of control. Yet, we should lower taxes. I'm all for lowering taxes, but first we have to make cuts and just cutting education and environment programs is not going to work.

You have to look at the big piece of the pie, which nobody is willing to do. One side wants to raise taxes and spend. The other side wants to lower, but not make serious cuts. Either way, we're screwed.

Saying it is there money makes it seem black and white or good vs. evil. It's never as easy as that. Reality is always more greyish. If we have to have taxes, tax the people who are still going to be rich after they pay them.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
Sigh.

Suppose we impose a 100% tax on all income over $200,000 a year. What happens?

1. The revenues collected don't come close to covering the profligacy of our spending on ourselves through federal, state, and local government. And it won't come close...
2. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you!" and tool their money and their productive capacity and their human ingenuity offshore and out of our reach for next year and beyond.
3. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you!" and stopped doing anything productive once they made their $200,000 since they couldn't keep it anyway.
4. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you" and spent 20 percent of their pre $200,000 income hiring tax lawyers and trying to evade classification of their official income as greater than $200,000.
5. EVEN IF none of those earning less than $200,000 stopped taking risks and innovating since their gains from risk-taking and innovation are going to be maxed at a paltry $200,000 grand a year.

NO INCREASE IN TAXES WILL EVER -- EVER -- KEEP US FROM GETTING SCREWED. Because the bigger they get, the more taxes screw with our incentives to produce and innovate.

An economy grows as its productivity increases. Productivity grows only with innovation. And innovation -- the putting of new knowledge to work in productive ways -- only takes place if innovators are willing to put in a crapload of work and take a crapload of risk.

And when innovation works, what happens to the distribution of income. It gets more and more skewed. Successful innovators end up earning a lot more. If we want to stay living in the richest economy in the history of the world, we have to be willing to LET people accumulate and keep incomes that are farther and farther away from us.

Even if some of those rich bastards do turn into Paris Hiltons.

Because that's the ONLY way to keep us from getting screwed.

Government can't increase our productivity. It can provide us with the occasional public goods -- national parks, national defense against hordes of rampaging Canadians. But apart, perhaps, from the occasional grant of temporary monopoly power to innovators (e.g. through patents), it simply isn't set up to provide incentives for innovation.

What the government does is manage an incredibly complicated system of transfer payments. Use a hundred thousand pages a year of laws and regulations to shift pieces of whatever pie has been created outside by real people and real innovators.

This is why "political solution" is an oxymoron, and why politicians on both sides are useless. ALL they can do is fight over ways of splitting up pies between this or that constituency as they take their own cut. They don't do anything that increases the pie.

They can't. When it comes to increasing innovation and productivity, politicians are as useless as extra nipples on a man.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

You just pick and choose what to see?

"longtimefan" wrote:



I think he just chooses to deliberately misconstrue plain English. Somehow the word "most" got transmogrified to "all" in his head.

Take a wild guess what the fastest growing demographic of Viagra users is. Hint: it's not men over 50 .

By the way, I would probably have a lot more sympathy for public employee unions if they weren't, as Alexander Green so aptly put it, "a group that traditionally tells political leaders what they 'must have,' not what they 'want.'" A little honesty would go a long way toward earning public sympathy.

The unions might want to get with the times too. As Green also points out, the poll numbers for politicians who are taking a stand against the unions are actually rising. Predictions of these politicians committing career suicide are overblown.

It may well turn out that it is the unions, not the politicians, who are hoisting themselves with their own petards.
Porforis
14 years ago

The unions might want to get with the times too. As Green also points out, the poll numbers for politicians who are taking a stand against the unions are actually rising. Predictions of these politicians committing career suicide are overblown.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Not doubting you here, but do you have a link to some of these polls? I'm curious to see what area this encompasses (just Wisconsin, or the country). This definitely did rile up the left, and that means more of them will go out to vote in 2012 when their politicians tell them that the republicans are going to ban unions and strip away all workers' rights.
porky88
14 years ago

Sigh.

Suppose we impose a 100% tax on all income over $200,000 a year. What happens?

1. The revenues collected don't come close to covering the profligacy of our spending on ourselves through federal, state, and local government. And it won't come close...
2. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you!" and tool their money and their productive capacity and their human ingenuity offshore and out of our reach for next year and beyond.
3. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you!" and stopped doing anything productive once they made their $200,000 since they couldn't keep it anyway.
4. EVEN IF none of those earning over $200,000/year said "fuck you" and spent 20 percent of their pre $200,000 income hiring tax lawyers and trying to evade classification of their official income as greater than $200,000.
5. EVEN IF none of those earning less than $200,000 stopped taking risks and innovating since their gains from risk-taking and innovation are going to be maxed at a paltry $200,000 grand a year.

NO INCREASE IN TAXES WILL EVER -- EVER -- KEEP US FROM GETTING SCREWED. Because the bigger they get, the more taxes screw with our incentives to produce and innovate.

An economy grows as its productivity increases. Productivity grows only with innovation. And innovation -- the putting of new knowledge to work in productive ways -- only takes place if innovators are willing to put in a crapload of work and take a crapload of risk.

And when innovation works, what happens to the distribution of income. It gets more and more skewed. Successful innovators end up earning a lot more. If we want to stay living in the richest economy in the history of the world, we have to be willing to LET people accumulate and keep incomes that are farther and farther away from us.

Even if some of those rich bastards do turn into Paris Hiltons.

Because that's the ONLY way to keep us from getting screwed.

Government can't increase our productivity. It can provide us with the occasional public goods -- national parks, national defense against hordes of rampaging Canadians. But apart, perhaps, from the occasional grant of temporary monopoly power to innovators (e.g. through patents), it simply isn't set up to provide incentives for innovation.

What the government does is manage an incredibly complicated system of transfer payments. Use a hundred thousand pages a year of laws and regulations to shift pieces of whatever pie has been created outside by real people and real innovators.

This is why "political solution" is an oxymoron, and why politicians on both sides are useless. ALL they can do is fight over ways of splitting up pies between this or that constituency as they take their own cut. They don't do anything that increases the pie.

They can't. When it comes to increasing innovation and productivity, politicians are as useless as extra nipples on a man.

"Wade" wrote:



Personally, I don't think $200,000 today is big business.

Big Business is conservative. To be conservative is to conserve. What do they conserve? Money. Therefore, they save their money. They do not invest into the economy. They have a plan and they stay the course of that plan. There are exceptions, but not many.

The economy does not live and die by big business. Donald Trump does not dictate the economy. In fact, the rich are doing very well. Their taxes are lower today than 50 years ago. The riches handful of people in the country make more money than everyone else.

Wall street has recovered from the recession just fine. The stock market has rose 5,000 points since the scare in 08. The idea that if it's good for the rich, it's good for everyone is not true.

The problem is not that we overtax the rich. The problem is this country doesn't know how to prioritize it's spending. We also are very content with the status quo. Look at the highways. You'd think we'd update them or build something new? Nope. Same with our railways.

We're still living in the 20th century, but it is the 21st century.
porky88
14 years ago

The unions might want to get with the times too. As Green also points out, the poll numbers for politicians who are taking a stand against the unions are actually rising. Predictions of these politicians committing career suicide are overblown.

"Porforis" wrote:



Not doubting you here, but do you have a link to some of these polls? I'm curious to see what area this encompasses (just Wisconsin, or the country). This definitely did rile up the left, and that means more of them will go out to vote in 2012 when their politicians tell them that the republicans are going to ban unions and strip away all workers' rights.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



I can't say for all politicians, but Walker's has a higher disapproval than approval. Also, gallup did a poll and found that two thirds of the country are not in favor of taking away collective bargaining.

Presidential years = higher turnout regardless of whether or not the union was going to get involve. Higher turnout favors democrats.

My point is that 2012 is not going to be anything like 2010. Just like 2010 was nothing like 2008.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/146276/Scaling-Back-State-Programs-Least-Three-Fiscal-Evils.aspx 
djcubez
14 years ago
The Pearl Harbor of the Class War . Another interesting article attacking Walker and the GOP. Obviously biased but I agree with a lot of the points about Republican politics and strategy.
dhpackr
14 years ago

By the way, I would probably have a lot more sympathy for public employee unions if they weren't, as Alexander Green so aptly put it, "a group that traditionally tells political leaders what they 'must have,' not what they 'want.'" A little honesty would go a long way toward earning public sympathy.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Its obvious you are completely clueless how collective bargaining works!
So if you meet me Have some courtesy, Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse, Or I'll lay your soul to waste
4PackGirl
14 years ago
the financial instability of our country is not the fault of the unions or the private sector - it's the fault of the people that WE put into office who make the rules that effect the finances of our country.

our country cannot help EVERYONE ALL THE TIME! until WE realize that WE have to stand on our own two feet & deal with our lives & finances, the politicians will continue to use us as their puppets.
Porforis
14 years ago

By the way, I would probably have a lot more sympathy for public employee unions if they weren't, as Alexander Green so aptly put it, "a group that traditionally tells political leaders what they 'must have,' not what they 'want.'" A little honesty would go a long way toward earning public sympathy.

"dhpackr" wrote:



Its obvious you are completely clueless how collective bargaining works!

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Please explain it to all us idiots that don't see things exactly the way you do.
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
    Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
    Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
    Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : uh oh
    Martha Careful (1-Apr) : Too bad camera's can't spot the ball as well.
    Mucky Tundra (1-Apr) : So will the chain gang be gone completely or will they still be around as a backup or whatever?
    Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : The method for measuring first downs in the NFL will switch from chain gangs to camera-based technology in 2025, the league announced.
    Martha Careful (1-Apr) : A big step in the right direction. Just put in the college system is very very good.
    Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : NFL has passed a rule that allows both teams to possess the ball in OT during the regular season
    Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : Touchbacks on kickoffs will now bring the ball to the 35-yard line.
    beast (31-Mar) : It might of gotten more popular recently, but braiding hair (even men) in certain cultures goes back for centuries.
    Martha Careful (30-Mar) : Is men braiding their hair a new style thing? Watching the NCAA men's tournament many players have done
    Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Ha. Well, it'd be nice for folks to reset their own password. Via validated email 😏
    beast (29-Mar) : Monopoly was supposed to be an educational game, that show how evil capitalism was and how we should avoid it
    beast (29-Mar) : Lol, I was thinking username would be better, as then I wouldn't have to keep an email up to date lol 😂
    beast (29-Mar) : Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
    wpr (29-Mar) : sure is
    Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Monopoly is a rip off of The Landlord's Game
    wpr (27-Mar) : 28 days until the draft
    earthquake (27-Mar) : Which seemed strange to my 9 year old self, that you could be a fan for a team other than the one you play for
    earthquake (27-Mar) : Nothing eventful happened, other than it being clear that he was a bengals fan
    earthquake (27-Mar) : And we went and hung out with him one afternoon, I must have been 9 or so
    earthquake (27-Mar) : That’s wild, when I was a kid my friend lived in the same apartment complex in De Pere
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : Only career highspot was a 200 yard rushing game while playing for the Cardinals
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : He is a former Packer. Drafted out of Northern Illinois. Didn't do much in GB.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Despicable
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Former NFL. I think Packers too
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : NFL RB Leshon Johnson has been charged in a massive dog fighting operation, with the FBI seizing over 190 Pit Bulls
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Some real irony of a QB as short as Wilson playing for the Giants
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Giants country, let's be the tall beings of lore!
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Russell Wilson signs with the Giants.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
    wpr (25-Mar) : I don't think there is a significant difference. I use a user name for many. Others email.
    Martha Careful (25-Mar) : email
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : would it be better to use EMAIL or USERNAME to log into a site?
    wpr (25-Mar) : Thanks Zero
    Zero2Cool (24-Mar) : New forum has the ability to Thank a post now.
    beast (24-Mar) : And the only time they have won the Championship in an even year, was the first time they did, in 2006.
    beast (24-Mar) : Since 2007, there have been 10 odd numbered years, Wisconsin Women have won the Championship in 7 of those 10 odd numbered years.
    buckeyepackfan (24-Mar) : Congratulations Lady Badger Hockey Team. NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
    Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : I don't think it's completed yet. it was just announced last month, right?
    dhazer (23-Mar) : did netflix ever release the Packers documentary
    Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : And it is glorious!
    beast (21-Mar) : Unsigned FA QB Rodgers is supposedly in the Steelers building
    Martha Careful (19-Mar) : But I don't own a car! So can I still use it in my apartment?
    Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : btw, new site auto updates
    Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : Woohoo!
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    Recent Topics
    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

    28-Mar / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / dfosterf

    28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    25-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    24-Mar / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

    24-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    21-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    19-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.