- 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
re: Little Miss Tippie Top Ocasio-Cortez wants to raise taxes to 70% to pay for some socialist
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:30 pm to superwolf
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:30 pm to superwolf
LINK
Ann Coulter has tweeted
lol
Ann Coulter has tweeted
quote:
Ocasio-Cortez wants a 70-80% income tax on the rich. I agree! Start with the Koch Bros. -- and also make it WEALTH tax.
lol
0
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:35 pm to superwolf
quote:So intellectual. We should do whatever she says.
But once you get to the tippie tops
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:36 pm to superwolf
quote:
as you climb up this ladder, you should be contributing more
How about the 30% or so of this country dependant on government assistance contribute above a net 0.
If the rich have to contribute more, shouldn't eveyone have to contribute somthing first?
This post was edited on 1/4/19 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:37 pm to upgrayedd
quote:$100 says it’s above his income.
At what income do you feel that rate is unreasonable?
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:41 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
He's a Marxist. Really
Oh. Then I feel that taxing him at 100% and me at 0% is quite reasonable.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:43 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:This.
- The great bulk of taxable income is still in the middle three quintiles in America
- Raising the top end rates up to confiscatory levels (say 70+% for the highest brackets) would barely put a dent in the cost of their proposed programs (Medicare for All, free university, etc.)
. If you took all of it it would be less $400B. 
Ms Tippie Top should leant some damn math. quote:Clearly any significan increases in revenue would have to come from people that consider themselves “middle class”. Sadly many of those are voting democrat against their better interests. There’s tough times ahead for anyone making over $50k.
Saying anything else is just lying. "Tax the rich!" only gets you a small part of the way there.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:44 pm to superwolf
The Right needs to take her seriously. She may be as dumb as a bag of dildos, but she represents a throbbing wave of voters in this country that’s getting longer, girthier and veinier every day.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 12:46 pm to superwolf
She can have 100% of my Italian sauseech!
Posted on 1/4/19 at 1:06 pm to Redleg Guy
We found our first white knight.
I'm sure socialism will work, this time.
I'm sure socialism will work, this time.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 4:06 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Posted on 1/4/19 at 4:19 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
Is it really a stretch to see where the federal gov't could use the border wall against it's citizenry?
Why would the IRS need you physically present to take your ones and zeroes?
Posted on 1/4/19 at 4:36 pm to junkfunky
quote:
AC handled that well considering she said she wanted to take most of his money.
really the best part of the video is the irony of AC "the rich guy" being subjugated by AC "the compromised reporter"
she sits there all earnest and naive, flashing her big toothy smile and she tells AC that he is not doing his part and paying his fair share. Not only does AC NOT challenge her with any follow up questions, he sits there silently and gives her the full floor to use.
I can only imagine the "rules" he had to agree to get her on camera interview. What a hack.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 4:50 pm to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
quote:
Top marginal rates didn’t come down until 1982. Try again, piggy.
LINK
Your own goddamn link says the highest marginal rates were unchanged between the early 1960's and 1982, dumbass.
Also, here's something the article didn't say: the rates weren't inflation-indexed until 1978. Effectively, the highest marginal rates were covering more and more people. Think that didn't have a strong economic effect?
Posted on 1/4/19 at 4:54 pm to superwolf
I don’t agree with a 70% tax rate or this green new deal, but the fact that y’all are so wound up by a freshman house rep from NY who won her district with like 5k votes makes me like her.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 5:26 pm to Redleg Guy
EAD
Posted on 1/4/19 at 5:28 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
Your own goddamn link says the highest marginal rates were unchanged between the early 1960's and 1982, dumbass.
I never brought up marginal rates that was your terminology. Look at the diagram at the bottom of the page. That is what I'm referring to.
Here is a little tidbit for your marginal tax rate but it is irrelevant. The diagram at the bottom of the page is self explanatory.
quote:
And there rates stayed, right through the early 1980s. The economy of the 1970s, of course, was horrendous--a condition that was later often blamed on high marginal tax rates. Based on the history of the 1950s, however, which had higher marginal tax rates, the cause of the 1970s misery was more likely stagflation.
God Bless and good night. Posted on 1/4/19 at 5:43 pm to boogiewoogie1978
You weren’t referring to marginal rates? Because that’s exactly what my response referred to, homeboy.
And most economists would disagree that marginal rates didn’t have a strong effect in the late 70’s, among other inputs.
That article is nothing new and is all well-known and debatable. Were the high marginal rates responsible for the recession in the 50’s? Or just the boom in the mid to late 60’s? Or were they responsible again for the downturn in the 70’s?
You can’t answer that because I’m pretty sure you don’t know enough to effectively answer that.
And most economists would disagree that marginal rates didn’t have a strong effect in the late 70’s, among other inputs.
That article is nothing new and is all well-known and debatable. Were the high marginal rates responsible for the recession in the 50’s? Or just the boom in the mid to late 60’s? Or were they responsible again for the downturn in the 70’s?
You can’t answer that because I’m pretty sure you don’t know enough to effectively answer that.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 6:17 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
Were the high marginal rates responsible for the recession in the 50’s? Or just the boom in the mid to late 60’s? Or were they responsible again for the downturn in the 70’s?
You played yourself, son. Your statement shows that marginal tax rates don't much affect the economy like that - so let's tax the rich.
Posted on 1/4/19 at 6:27 pm to BamaAtl
I did not, son.
The dropping marginal rates, though still very high, probably played a role in the 60’s boom. Is capital still as immobile as it was then? Global economy still the same? What happened when Britain tried that in the 70’s?
I’ll go economic toe to toe with you all day.
The dropping marginal rates, though still very high, probably played a role in the 60’s boom. Is capital still as immobile as it was then? Global economy still the same? What happened when Britain tried that in the 70’s?
I’ll go economic toe to toe with you all day.
Posted on 1/5/19 at 4:04 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
The dropping marginal rates, though still very high, probably played a role in the 60’s boom.
Let's bring it back to the 60s level of 70%, then.
But I thought all of the economics PhDs here like conservativedumbasswifey told us that tax rates that high would literally implode the country! Into a black hole!
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News