Shrug, I think the only thing that should have been done was let the investment firms fail and then have sweeping prosecutions for gross negligence and fraud.
Well sure, if you want deflation and another great depression. I was making the assumption that that was undesirable. I agree on the prosecutions though. However some of the misdeeds were not against the law anymore due to less regulation.
Corporate welfare is welfare nonetheless. And yea people do sort of pay in, in the same way that people at the bottom of a Ponzi scheme pay in for their future gains.
Corporate welfare is something entirely different that was not even brought up, but yea that's a problem. Still kind of small potatoes though. SS is not a ponzi scheme. It's just poorly run. Here is what they need to do. You know how once you get to $106K, they stop taking SS tax on everything made over that? Well it should kick back in again maybe at $500K. Maybe raise the business part of the tax 2 points, raise individual 1 point.
Hehe, that's funny I was watching some debate, I think maybe the guy who was filling in for Chris Matthews, and something they said reminded me of this conversation, and the fact that secular progressives tend to say "unethical" and not "immoral". Sounds like you agree. But in any case they're all under-taught at the moment.
Well it all depends on your understanding of the subtleties of the words. "Morality tends to be even more subjective and can be used to included various cultural and religious taboos that are seemingly arbitrary and completely rejected as meaningless by many people. However, as long as it's not about praying or banning porn and heavy metal, or other such silliness, I think we agree.
He spent an enormous amount of time speaking divisively about other topics, so it's not like he avoids controversy.
Or so fox news would have you believe anyway. Actually he seemed to pussy-foot around much more than any president I've seen first hand, Republican OR Democrat. Well at least until the last few months anyway. He's starting to figure out that sort of thing isn't very effective.
Yes, you said "regardless of what it is", and you were wrong, and I gave an example of why you were wrong. The Republicans haven't been stonewalling "regardless", they've been trying (in their opinion) to put the brakes on some really horrific enormous piles of federal overreaching bureaucracy.
You're pretty much doing the same thing again. Like I said, they do it on everything, even if it was something they had supported to some extent in the past. Even when compromises were made. The Democrats do that to a point, but they usually cave in the end. However bitching about opposition when in power and bitching about having the right to gum up the works out of power seems to be quite strong regardless of who is in power. Want to hear republicans and Democrats switch arguments? Listen to news stories from when the republicans were in power. Interesting how they all say they opposite of what they say now. It's all spin. 100% pure BS.
Well, yes, they may keep it. If your goal is to level the playing field and spread the wealth around, then yea it's a foregone conclusion that progressive income tax rates need to be high.
Do you stay awake at night, frustrated that your neighbors might make more money than you? Those scoundrels! :)
Well I think that underscores the problem. You have bought into a straw man.
The goal is NOT leveling the playing field. That's not even possible. The goal is to stimulate the economy. That by the way, is what trickle down is supposed to do. Progressive taxes is nothing but a work around on the back end for the redistribution of labor. That's when we pay people next to nothing and reap the benefits of lower prices. Corporations of course pocket most of that, but we get a little cut too. It's just the industrialized 1st world version of the sweatshop.
I know that last bit is a joke. However I don't think even remotely like that. I really don't care. Life isn't fair, we can try to make it a little less unfair, but it's never going to be fair, not even close.
I just think someone who makes a little more than me should have to pay just a little bit higher tax rate. Just like I think someone who makes just a little less than me, should pay a little lower rate than I do. Going back to the way the top tax margin was in the 40's and 50's would be nice as well. As it is now greed is rampant and it also puts a huge tax burden on people who are just upper middle class, or at the bottom of the upper class.