CreateDebate


Debate Info

10
12
Fly me to the moon! I was about to sell it anyway
Debate Score:22
Arguments:22
Total Votes:28
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Fly me to the moon! (9)
 
 I was about to sell it anyway (11)

Debate Creator

Rusticus(253) pic



Aren't you thrilled you'll soon get a huge tax break for your private jet?

The GOP is about to give us filthy rich folks a huge tax break!  We'll get a huge tax break for our private jets and our kids won't have to pay any of that nasty death tax when we die and leave them our billions.  After all, the last thing we want is for them to ever work a day in their lives, right?  I'm so glad the working class morons are so stupid that they actually believe that they're going to get a tax cut when all they get is a little dip for a year and then their taxes go UP! UP! UP! while ours go DOWN! DOWN! DOWN! forever!  Yippeeee!!!  And the best thing about this tax package we're ramming through congress is that it's going to create a HUGE increase of the national debt (one and a half TRILLION DOLLARS) which means that when the bill comes due we'll spring reality on these stupid working class suckers, tell them the government is broke and then shut down medicaid, medicare and then the big one, SOCIAL SECURITY!  I can't believe that we can still convince these simpletons that trickle down economics is a good thing when is been proven a lie time and time again.   Every time we've done this same exact thing and given our corporations huge tax cuts we take the profits and hoard them and make sure we don't trickle on any of those morons!  The last time we cut the corporate tax rates in 1986 from 46 percent to 34 percent WAGES FELL FOR TEN YEARS.  HAHAHAHAHA!!!!  Trickle down, gotta love it!  I think those idiots just like being pissed on!

Bruce Bartlett, Senior Policy Analyst for the Reagan administration:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGXRojF7WmI

Fly me to the moon!

Side Score: 10
VS.

I was about to sell it anyway

Side Score: 12
Side: Fly me to the moon!
1 point

I get a kick out of all the people who do not pay Federal income tax being worried about how much the rich will pay. The following are from IRS.gov tax year 2013 statistics:

Top 1% -

37.8% of all tax, but 19% of all Adjusted Gross Income (AGI)

Notice the much vilified Top 1% of earners pay for more than a third of what the Federal Government does.

Top 2% -

46.1% of all tax, but 24.3% of all AGI

Percentile 98

8.3% of all tax, but 5.3% of all AGI

Top 5% -

58.5% of all tax, but 34.4% of all AGI

Percentiles 95-97 (3% of population)

12.4% of all tax, but 10.1% of all AGI

Top 10% -

69.8% of all tax, but 45.9% of all AGI

Percentiles 90-94 (5% of population)

11.3% of all tax, but 11.5% of all AGI

Notice that the top 10% pay about 70% of all personal income tax paid.

Top 25% -

86.3% of all tax, but 68.1% of all AGI

Percentiles 75-89 (15% of population)

16.5% of all tax, but 22.2% of all AGI

Top 50% -

97.2% of all tax, but 88.5% of all AGI

Percentiles 50-26 (25% of population)

10.9% of all tax, but 20.4% of all AGI

Notice that the 50th to 75th percentile pay a much smaller percentage of tax than they earn. They do not receive any welfare entitlements, but they do use most of the subsidized interest loans for college and first homebuyer programs.)

Bottom 50%

2.8% of all tax, but 11.5% of all AGI

Percentiles 1-50 (50% of population)

2.8% of all tax, but 11.5% of all AGI

Half of these folks are in the bottom half of the middle class, most of whom are in the process of moving up from the bottom 25% to the upper 50% (and will achieve it within their lifetimes.)

>40% pay no Federal Income Tax These people have no business complaining about how much anybody else pays in Federal Taxes. If you are not pitching in for the pizza, you don't get to complain about how much everybody else paid or whether it was fair.

>15% receive some sort of Federal public assistance(Statistics range from 15-25% for receiving non-retirement, non-VA, non-college aid federal benefits) These people have no business complaining about how much anybody else pays in Federal Taxes at all. All these folks should be saying is, "THANK YOU!" especially to the top 10%.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
0 points

The following are from IRS.gov tax year 2013 statistics

So in other words I am correct, and you do have some local data which you are going to insist means the theory of maths is wrong.

You are absolutely pathetic.

I get a kick out of all the people who do not pay Federal income tax being worried about how much the rich will pay.

I get a kick out of you saying we should lower tax so that the rich become prepared to pay their tax.

Side: I was about to sell it anyway
marcusmoon(244) Clarified
1 point

Nom,

So in other words I am correct, and you do have some local data which you are going to insist means the theory of maths is wrong.

The topic is United States income tax. I used the most recent available data from the United States Internal Revenue Service.

If you were not so ignorant of basic things about the United States, you would have realized that IRS means the data is national, not local.

I get a kick out of you saying we should lower tax so that the rich become prepared to pay their tax.

Nobody said that. Learn to read.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
0 points

This piece of legislation is designed to incentivize the nation's work shy hangers-on to smarten themselves up, work cleverly and buy private jets.

This way almost everyone who wants a private jet will enjoy this tax break instead of the ''wank/jerk off breaks'' they currently take at all too regular frequencies.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
1 point

This piece of legislation is designed to incentivize the nation's work shy hangers-on to smarten themselves up, work cleverly and buy private jets.

Lol. Right brother. That's the way it works. Everybody can have private jets. Those who haven't got them simply don't work as hard. The single moms who work three jobs are just lazy, and the fat parasitic bankers who spend their days sucking the teat of everybody else's labour are considerably more deserving of life's little luxuries.

In other news, Narnia's President has resigned, stating irreconcilable political differences with the Lion.

Side: I was about to sell it anyway
1 point

The single moms who work three jobs are just lazy

If you have time to work 3 jobs, you have 3 part time jobs which equals? One full time job.

And if you want to find a job that involves no prior experience and pays well, the factories are right there. You just have to apply and be willing to work. No one is forced to work at Walmart. They choose to.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
1 point

"An aspiring machinist -- a popular factory job -- can start training at 18 and then do a one- or two-year manufacturing apprenticeship. In five years, he or she could be making more than $50,000. In 10 years, that could double to $100,000.

Not a bad salary for a 28-year-old.

"If you're really good at your work, you could remain employed for a very long time, because there are so few of us," said Sedlak.

Sedlak's top worker makes $30 an hour. And annual pay at his company ranges between $70,000 and $80,000 with overtime. In 31 years, only three workers have retired from his factory.

Still, with almost 13 million unemployed Americans, including many high school graduates, he is struggling to fill positions.

A recent Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte report underscores that. Manufacturers currently have 600,000 vacancies nationwide, it said."

money.cnn.com/2012/02/27/smallbusiness/youth manufacturingjobs/index.htm

Side: Fly me to the moon!
Antrim(1000) Disputed
0 points

If immoral, loose woman want to sleep around without using any of the numerous birth control measures available, get pregnant, have their fatherless brats and then whinge about the world being ill divided then their rants should be ignored and those, prudent, hard working knights of industry and commerce should be left to enjoy the trappings of their well earned life styles.

'' The poor ye shall have with thee always but you will not always have me''.

Okay, Jesus was correct, he's not here but the the legions of poor, hapless dumb ass, work shy losers are here in all their shameless glory.

Let the filth wallow in the quagmire they made for themselves.

If sanctimonious shit heads like you feel these low lives deserve to be supported then you should all form a 'bleeding hearts club' and donate whatever % of your income you can afford, whilst leaving the rest of us alone.

We don't object about the poor infesting the streets of our towns and cities so why do you complain about people being rich?

BTY;- C.S.Lewis, the distinguished author of the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe to which you ignorantly referred, was born in my home city, Belfast , and could have easily afforded a fleet of private jets.

The poor usually stink, get drunk and make life intolerable for decent hard working folk.

Wise up, grow up and shut to fuck up.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
1 point

Best to divest pretty seriously - the national debt is about to skyrocket, and make the dollar plummet to around one yen.

Side: I was about to sell it anyway
1 point

This tax bill is all about creating another giant transfer of wealth from the working class to the uber rich.

This is the 2 Santa Claus Theory in action. If you're not familiar with the Two Santa Claus Theory I urge you to investigate it because once you understand it you'll see how dramatically it's affected our government and our lives.

The Two Santa Claus Theory is a political theory and strategy published by Jude Wanniski in 1976, which he promoted within the United States Republican Party.

The theory states that in democratic elections, if Democrats appeal to voters by proposing programs to help people, then the Republicans cannot gain broader appeal by proposing less spending. The first "Santa Claus" of the theory title refers to the Democrats who promises programs to help the disadvantaged.

The "Two Santa Claus Theory" recommends that the Republicans must assume the role of a second Santa Claus by not arguing to cut spending but by offering the option of cutting taxes.

"According to Wanniski, the theory is simple. In 1976, he wrote that the Two-Santa Claus Theory suggests that "the Republicans should concentrate on tax-rate reduction. As they succeed in expanding incentives to produce, they will move the economy back to full employment and thereby reduce social pressures for public spending. Just as an increase in Government spending inevitably means taxes must be raised, a cut in tax rates—by expanding the private sector—will diminish the relative size of the public sector."

Wanniski suggested this position, as Thom Hartmann has clarified, so that the Democrats would "have to be anti-Santas by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections."

What this means is that when Republicans are in power and have control of the congress they cut taxes dramatically and at the same time they spend like crazy which runs up the deficit and damages the economy (George W. Bush). Then when Democrats are in power they have to raise taxes to repair the damage the Republicans left behind while the Republicans scream about them raising taxes. At the same time the Republicans do a 180 degree turn-around and begin to scream about how horrible the deficit and the national debt are and they blame it all on the Democrats and demand cuts to social programs like medicare, medicaid and social security which they hate because these are all programs created by Democrats and are loved by the American people.

Remember when GWB was President Republicans launched a scheme to have everyone have an individual social security account that would be managed by big banks. This was a plan to steal our social security funds and had the Democrats not stopped them the GOP engineered crash of 2008 would have wiped them all out and the bankers wildest dreams would have come true.

This cycle repeats and has repeated over and over. Do ten minutes of research and you'll get it.

Supporting Evidence: Jude Wanniski and the Two Santa Claus Theory (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: I was about to sell it anyway
1 point

Rusticus,

This sounds about right.

You left out an important part. When tax rates are cut, tax revenues rise. This seems to be possible ONLY because the Democrat cycle includes raising taxes, which reduces investments, etc.. That way the second Santa can keep coming in with something to give.

The real problem is on the benefits program side. Most of these programs are initially small, grow, never go away, and become sacred cows. The disaster of all of this is that while tax rates fluctuate, social spending increases pretty steadily.Over 50% (and growing) of the Federal budget is "entitlements," which are gifts the first Santa gave and neither can really take back.

It is easier to take back the second Santa's gifts, and that happens regularly. Obviously this is because most taxes are paid by very few toward the top (the top 10% of earners pay 69.8% of taxes.) The bottom 40% of voters pay no Federal Income Tax, so when tax rates go up, relatively few voters are alienated.

By contrast a much larger percentage receive non-retirement Federal benefits. Over 15% are on some welfare program or other (SNAP, TANF, etc.) When Social Security, subsidized Federal loans (Student loans, Fannie Mae, SBA, etc.,) Medicaid, Medicare, and Obamacare subsidies are factored in, some estimates put the number of recipients at >40% (or >50%) of Americans. So if the benefits programs were to be cut to any useful degree, NOBODY would get reelected.

Side: I was about to sell it anyway
0 points

You left out an important part. When tax rates are cut, tax revenues rise.

Ahahahahahahaha! Right. Let's charge everybody less so they pay more. Why stop at income tax though? Why not just lower the price of everything? Oh, that's right. My bad. Because that doesn't directly benefit the upper class, does it?

Are you a paid shill, Marcus? Or are you actually stupid enough to have an upside down understanding of the way maths works? If I charge you ten dollars and you pay it, I make more money than if I charge you one dollar and you pay it. You seem in fact to be arguing that we should lower tax rates so that the upper class decides to pay their taxes. This is analogous to saying we should charge less for clothes so that people don't steal them.

I personally believe you are a shill. I think you probably have some local data on hand which suggests lowering tax rates increased revenue in a particular time and place, and are intending to use it as cover while you turn maths upside down.

Side: Fly me to the moon!
0 points

The only thing that trickled down from the Republican party for YEARS were the tears of Boehner, and even HE has dried up! Conservatives say that, since the country is in debt we can't afford to subsidize the underfunded schools that are failing our youth, so, the best way to get rid of underfunded schools is to stop funding them altogether, problem solved! While liberals see many of the youth of today as illiterate, uneducated and unprepared for a complex world, conservatives see them as future party voters.

This tax "reform" follows the conservative mantra that says: Tax cuts for the rich, tax hikes on the poor, indoctrinated kids, smart bombs and what's good for Walmart and Exxon Mobil is good for America! This just looks like more "lipstick on a pig"!

Side: I was about to sell it anyway
1 point

Dang, but ain't thet a purty pig? Don't thet mouth jest make ya wanna...NSFW...

Side: I was about to sell it anyway