- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
A Nation of Takers?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:39 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:39 am
Article by Nicholas Kristof
I know you guys are going to pan this guy as being a Marxist, but I think he has a point.
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
quote:
In the debate about poverty, critics argue that government assistance saps initiative and is unaffordable. After exploring the issue, I must concede that the critics have a point. Here are five public welfare programs that are wasteful and turning us into a nation of “takers.”
quote:
But, perhaps because we now have the wealthiest Congress in history, the first in which a majority of members are millionaires, we have a one-sided discussion demanding cuts only in public assistance to the poor, while ignoring public assistance to the rich. And a one-sided discussion leads to a one-sided and myopic policy.
I know you guys are going to pan this guy as being a Marxist, but I think he has a point.
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
16
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:41 am to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
YES!!!! This board argues this point to no end and no avail.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:41 am to Cole Beer
quote:
shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
If you can give evidence of these so called "tax breaks for the rich" we might be able to have a debate.
One thing is for sure, you can't label a tax break as a handout or subsidy. By that you are assuming that all money and wealth first belongs to the government, not the citizen, which is wrong
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:42 am to goldennugget
did you actually read the article?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:47 am to Cole Beer
Without reading the link the number of people deciding to live off of the "what the govt. can do for me versus what I can do for govt. war was lost almost fifty years ago.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:48 am to Cole Beer
Yes
First of all Kristof is a socialist liberal and also a statist who believes in an all powerful central government, so you have to take it with a grain of salt.
He refers to tax breaks as "welfare subsidies", which is misleading. He says this because he believes all wealth and property FIRST belongs to the government, which then allows the citizen to have some of it.
A welfare subsidy is a transfer of wealth, usually to someone who did not earn it. How does a tax break or tax writeoff qualify as a welfare subsidy? There is no transfer of wealth here. A tax break the citizen simply is keeping more of what is already theirs.
If you have the belief though that everything belongs to the government, of course you will view it as a welfare subsidy. But that is not the case here, all the examples outlined in the article are ways that people can keep more of what is ALREADY theirs.
So yes, we are a nation of takers. Our ever growing leviathan known as the federal government wants their hands on more and more of the citizen's private property and wealth.
First of all Kristof is a socialist liberal and also a statist who believes in an all powerful central government, so you have to take it with a grain of salt.
He refers to tax breaks as "welfare subsidies", which is misleading. He says this because he believes all wealth and property FIRST belongs to the government, which then allows the citizen to have some of it.
A welfare subsidy is a transfer of wealth, usually to someone who did not earn it. How does a tax break or tax writeoff qualify as a welfare subsidy? There is no transfer of wealth here. A tax break the citizen simply is keeping more of what is already theirs.
If you have the belief though that everything belongs to the government, of course you will view it as a welfare subsidy. But that is not the case here, all the examples outlined in the article are ways that people can keep more of what is ALREADY theirs.
So yes, we are a nation of takers. Our ever growing leviathan known as the federal government wants their hands on more and more of the citizen's private property and wealth.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:49 am to Cole Beer
Yes and no.
The millionaires get tax breaks for donations and charity. If they stop giving to universities that do research and development where do these schools get the money from? I know that some of the breaks seem unfair but if you take more from them they will not give as much. They pay taxes. Is it right to ask for more just because they have more than the poor?
The millionaires get tax breaks for donations and charity. If they stop giving to universities that do research and development where do these schools get the money from? I know that some of the breaks seem unfair but if you take more from them they will not give as much. They pay taxes. Is it right to ask for more just because they have more than the poor?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 11:53 am to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
Yes.
Government should never pick winners and losers in the free market. They should only ensure that the market remains fair and competitive.
Once you pick one industry to be a "winner" it has a negative effect on other industries, and that makes those "loser" industries either go out of business, or lobby for Government protection. Eventually the Government has their hand in every industry.
We need a small safety net for the poor, that is heavily restricted and maintained to be less than a minimum wage job. Everything else should be up to the individual.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:07 pm to Cole Beer
Huge difference between getting to KEEP some of the money you've actually earned and a direct wealth transfer payment from the gubment...ie
food stamps,section 8,earned income tas credit
etc,etc
How come libs are NEVER able to understand this difference?
food stamps,section 8,earned income tas credit
etc,etc
How come libs are NEVER able to understand this difference?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:07 pm to Cole Beer
quote:nope. In spite of the alleged waistful (!) tax breaks, "the rich" still pay the overwhelming majority of the taxes.
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:09 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
First, welfare subsidies for private planes. The United States offers three kinds of subsidies to tycoons with private jets: accelerated tax write-offs, avoidance of personal taxes on the benefit by claiming that private aircraft are for security, and use of air traffic control paid for by chumps flying commercial.
quote:
Second, welfare subsidies for yachts. The mortgage-interest deduction was meant to encourage a home-owning middle class. But it has been extended to provide subsidies for beach homes and even yachts.
In the meantime, money was slashed last year from the public housing program for America’s neediest. Hmm. How about if we house the homeless in these publicly supported yachts?
quote:
Fourth, welfare subsidies for America’s biggest banks. The too-big-to-fail banks in the United States borrow money unusually cheaply because of an implicit government promise to rescue them. Bloomberg View calculated last year that this amounts to a taxpayer subsidy of $83 billion to our 10 biggest banks annually.
President Obama has proposed a bank tax to curb this subsidy, and this year a top Republican lawmaker, Dave Camp, endorsed the idea as well. Big banks are lobbying like crazy to keep their subsidy.
Mostly agree with these.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:09 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist
Well clearly something must be done
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:11 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist
Some do need to lose weight.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:14 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
How often do you read this board? A hell of a lot of "us" are for cutting corporate subsidies, including farm subsidies.
Do you just make a stupid assumption that everyone hates the poor?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:25 pm to BigJim
quote:stupid. Accelerated depreciation doesn't reduce tax liability. It just delays it. The others are insignificant, as few own corporate jets as personal property. As for ATC.... If the general aviation folks weren't flying... Would ATC get laid off? Nope. They'd sit there and do nothing.
First, welfare subsidies for private planes. The United States offers three kinds of subsidies to tycoons with private jets: accelerated tax write-offs, avoidance of personal taxes on the benefit by claiming that private aircraft are for security, and use of air traffic control paid for by chumps flying commercial.
quote:While I agree that the HMID shouldn't exist for anyone, it does. And the middle class is a HUGE beneficiary of it. That said, should being rich disqualify one from the same privilege? Should the government be dictating what your home should look like to be eligible? Seems like we are judging right/wrong based on the amount in ones bank account.
Second, welfare subsidies for yachts. The mortgage-interest deduction was meant to encourage a home-owning middle class. But it has been extended to provide subsidies for beach homes and even yachts.
quote:Yeah f*ck it. Why need private property.
In the meantime, money was slashed last year from the public housing program for America’s neediest. Hmm. How about if we house the homeless in these publicly supported yachts?
quote:This is entirely misleading. If you want to end the bailout backstop--stop bailing them out. The proposed "tax" doesn't do that.
President Obama has proposed a bank tax to curb this subsidy
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 12:27 pm
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:28 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
Yeah, we could have done without the bailouts for those poor rich folks on Wall Street. We also could reduce wealth redistribution to foreign countries in the Mideast--e.g., the US taxpayers watch 30 percent of all foreign aid go to the Israelis alone.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:30 pm to goldennugget
quote:
A welfare subsidy is a transfer of wealth, usually to someone who did not earn it. How does a tax break or tax writeoff qualify as a welfare subsidy? There is no transfer of wealth here. A tax break the citizen simply is keeping more of what is already theirs
Exactly. The fact is, unless someone starts proposing tax breaks for the rich which are offset by ADDED TAXES on the poor, then the whole "tax break = welfare" is so much bull shite.
Alas, these idiots actually like to pretend that if a tax break for the rich means fewer handouts to poor people that this amounts to "taking" from the poor.
Only someone who views all property as that of the government can even begin to think such nonsense.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:32 pm to SettleDown
All of what I just said, I will add that yes, there most certainly ARE govt benefits handed out across the income spectrum and for most conservatives, THOSE are an issue too!
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:40 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
Well clearly something must be done
Odds that both of them are beneficiaries of a welfare program?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 12:41 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
If you're going to fight like hell to curb waist and fraud within the ranks of the poor, shouldn't we also cut waistful subsides and unnecessary tax breaks for the rich too?
So when is Obama gonna stop giving $85 billion a month to the rich in QE money?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News