It’s the End of the World As We Know It

[buckethead]

I agree.  The focus seems to be on the "financial elite".  Eliminating the "financial elite" has been tried in the good old USSR.  It was replaced with the "political elite" who then had control of the productive wealth of that country...

Except in this country there is almost like a natural symbiosis (not a conspiracy) between the financial elite (big business) and elite politicians and the hell with the rest of us.

It is a symbiosis alright. It's called incest, nepotism and cronyism. They (big money and politicians) are one in the same. Why on earth would someone worth hundreds of millions get into politics? Benevolence??? HA!!!

There will always be "political realities".

[buckethead]

Your assumption that progressive taxation works to tax the "rich" at a greater rate than the "middle class and poor" is misguided imo.

What could prove telling is to learn what the wealthiest actually pay in taxes. (the hundred million plus club).

Wealth is not taxed. Only income. Those in power (that's right, the hundred million plus club, along with their government employees {congress}) use loopholes and tax advantages along with grants to gain competitive advantage over the rest of the public.

Taxing consumption seems far wiser to me.

[finehoe]

Of course, I have no problem with those that choose to do so..........I just don't want to support them with my tax dollars as they numb themselves into dependence on government.........

Somehow I don't picture the Wall Street banksters, defense contractors, and agribusiness concerns that are supported by your tax dollars laying around watching Judge Judy, but you may well be right.

[NotNow]

What of the poor?  Should we maintain the current federal taxation policy which does not tax the poor at all, and if fact pays (or redistributes the wealth if you please) many.  Or should we "tax" everyone at least to some extent so that we maintain:

Quote
    A common contribution is essential for the maintenance of the public forces and for the cost of administration. This should be equitably distributed among all the citizens in proportion to their means

I like the consumption tax idea as well.

[Bostech]

This topic turned into taxation debate instead of original topic how criminal elements inside US government has turned prosperous country into debt driven society and failing economy.
This is not topic about "opinions" how country should function but about corrupted people who commited crimes agaisnt Americans and walked away while leaving Americans in debt.

[finehoe]

More food for thought:

Never before has so much debt been imposed on so many people by so few financial operatives--operatives who work from Wall Street, the largest casino in history, and a handful of its junior counterparts around the world, especially Europe.

External sovereign debt, as well as occasional default on such debt, is not unprecedented. What is rather unique in the case of the current global sovereign debt is that it is largely private debt billed as public debt; that is, debt that was accumulated by financial speculators and, then, offloaded onto governments to be paid by taxpayers as national debt. Having thus bailed out the insolvent banksters, many governments have now become insolvent or nearly insolvent themselves, and are asking the public to skimp on their bread and butter in order to service the debt that is not their responsibility.

After transferring trillions of dollars of bad debt or toxic assets from the books of financial speculators to those of governments, global financial moguls, their representatives in the State apparatus and corporate media are now blaming social spending (in effect, the people) as responsible for debt and deficit!

President Obama's recent motto of "fiscal responsibility" and his frequent grumbles about "out of control government spending" are reflections of this insidious strategy of blaming victims for the crimes of perpetrators. They also reflect the fact that the powerful financial interests that received trillions of taxpayers' dollars, which saved them from bankruptcy, are now dictating debt-collecting strategies through which governments can recoup those dollars from taxpayers. In effect, governments and multilateral institutions such as the IMF are acting as bailiffs or tax collectors on behalf of banksters and other financial wizards.

Not only is this unfair (it is, indeed, tantamount to robbery, and therefore criminal), it is also recessionary as it can increase unemployment and undermine economic growth. It is reminiscent of President Herbert Hoover's notorious economic policy of cutting spending during a recession, a contractionary fiscal policy that is bound to worsen the recession. It is, indeed, a recipe for a vicious circle of debt and depression: as spending is cut to pay debt, the economy and (therefore) tax revenues will shrink, which would then increase debt and deficit, and call for more spending cuts.

Spending on national infrastructure, both physical (such as roads and schools) and social infrastructure (such as health and education) is key to the long-term socioeconomic developments. Cutting public spending to pay for the sins of Wall Street gamblers is bound to undermine the long-term health of a society in terms of productivity enhancement and sustained growth.

But the powerful financial interests and their debt collectors seem to be more interested in collecting debt claims than investing in economic recovery, job creation or long-term socioeconomic development. Like most debt-collecting agencies, the IMF and the states serving as banksters' bailiffs through their austerity programs may shed a few crocodile tears in sympathy with the victims' of their belt-tightening policies; but, again like any other debt-collecting agents, they seem to be saying: "sorry for the loss of your job or your house, but debt must be collected--regardless."

A most outrageous aspect of the debt burden that is placed on the taxpayers' shoulders since 2008 is that most of the underlying debt claims are fictitious and illegitimate: they are largely due to manipulated asset price bubbles, dubious or illegal financial speculations, and scandalous conversion of financial gamblers' losses into public liability.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Vicious-Circle-of-Debt-by-Ismael-Hossein-zad-100606-391.html

[Doctor_K]

Not only is this unfair (it is, indeed, tantamount to robbery, and therefore criminal), it is also recessionary as it can increase unemployment and undermine economic growth. It is reminiscent of President Herbert Hoover's notorious economic policy of cutting spending during a recession, a contractionary fiscal policy that is bound to worsen the recession. It is, indeed, a recipe for a vicious circle of debt and depression: as spending is cut to pay debt, the economy and (therefore) tax revenues will shrink, which would then increase debt and deficit, and call for more spending cuts.

So with all of the European austerity measures and spending cuts, are we repeating history?

[Jerry Moran]

It is reminiscent of President Herbert Hoover's notorious economic policy of cutting spending during a recession, a contractionary fiscal policy that is bound to worsen the recession.

Citations, please.

[Timkin]

I agree.  The focus seems to be on the "financial elite".  Eliminating the "financial elite" has been tried in the good old USSR.  It was replaced with the "political elite" who then had control of the productive wealth of that country...

Except in this country there is almost like a natural symbiosis (not a conspiracy) between the financial elite (big business) and elite politicians and the hell with the rest of us.

I could not put this into better words ,personally.  I have no problem with someone who WORKED and WORKED HARD to make their wealth.   I do have a problem with someone who skimmed off the suffering and hard work of the middle or lesser class to gain their wealth.  I am not, nor likely will I ever be wealthy ,but if I were , I hope that I would be humanitarian enough to immensely help less fortunate folks..

[gatorback]

Eventually, who care? The new world is going to be more massive and powerful then ever. Trust me, you'll find your way and your workload will be tireless.

[gatorback]

If you want to work that is. Look at all the peeps on the unemp. list. Millions...for years.  You'd think they retrain, but why bother if you've got the backing of the dems and the repubs...can't go wrong.

[Timkin]

I have never collected unemp.  Only disability..and that was rightful ,, But I definitely want to work

[finehoe]

If you want to work that is. Look at all the peeps on the unemp. list. Millions...for years.  You'd think they retrain, but why bother if you've got the backing of the dems and the repubs...can't go wrong.

Yes, all those people living in the lap of luxury on their $275.00 a week (maximum).

[gatorback]

A return to a simpler life. That moola is keeping family afloat. I'm not liking the huge deficit but I'd rather foot the bill for this one. I've used the system twice in 20 years of working. Keep me drunk, ah... I mean, not homeless during that troubling time.

[Doctor_K]

If you want to work that is. Look at all the peeps on the unemp. list. Millions...for years.  You'd think they retrain, but why bother if you've got the backing of the dems and the repubs...can't go wrong.

Yes, all those people living in the lap of luxury on their $275.00 a week (maximum).

Not entirely correct, according to this AP story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100721/ap_on_bi_ge/us_unemployment_benefits

The overall measure would reauthorize the extended benefits program through the end of November, providing payments to millions of people who've been out of work for six months or more. Maximum benefits in some states are far higher than the $309 a week nationwide average payment. In Massachusetts, the top benefit is $943 a week; in Mississippi, it is $235.

Probably due to different cost-of-living standards, but that's my uneducated supposition.

However, I would like to know what the 'national average' is for this one:

At issue are payments averaging $309 a week for almost 5 million people whose 26 weeks of state benefits have run out. Those people are enrolled in a federally financed program providing up to 73 additional weeks of unemployment benefits.

Just how many unemployment programs are there?  And what's the final bill?  Does anyone know?