Show me the science to disprove the belief I currently, without any scientific proof, hold and I will disavow my original, unfounded beliefs.
(Very rough summary.)
(Very rough summary.)
GOP presidential candidate HERMAN CAIN, when asked on ABC News This Week if he should have defended a gay soldier who was booed by the conservative crowd at the last Republican presidential debate.
Yes, Herman. You should’ve spoken up for him “because of the controversy” and not because he’s a human being who is putting his life on the line for you in Afghanistan.
The media is being a bit unfair in criticizing the audience response in these debates.
The gay soldier? Totally outrageous. I don’t have much opinion on this coverage that varies from my normal beliefs. I am upset that no one defended the man’s service to his country.
The theoretical thirty year old? It wasn’t some poor uninsured kid that the question was hypothetically framing It was a person who could totally afford their insurance and chose not to pay and suddenly gets a stroke or seizure or something, thus ending up in a coma. Again, we can openly debate what society should do in that case and if we should have any responsibility to insure for our own health risks. But pundits and anchors alike are painting this as letting someone who had no choice die slowly from cancer, which is some of the set ups I’ve been hearing. Imagine an extremely rich person never got health insurance, blew their cash, and then got really sick. Should the government pay for their expenses when they were careless? That’s the idea of being free to take your own risks. They aren’t outright saying that those that aren’t well off don’t deserve any social safety net.
The death row stats? Again, this is more debatable in my opinion. If you’re for the death penalty instead of letting awful, harmful criminals who you believe cannot be rehabilitated be a burden on the tax payers though the system, you’d be excited to hear about a state being proactive in pursuing ultimate judgement. The view point is debatable, but these people aren’t craving blood or cheering for death. They see this as an ultimate form of justice for the worst of crimes. That number is an enforcement of that to them, they envision the worst of society, not the couple of innocents that may or may not have ended up in the shuffle.
Just felt like saying something about this, usually both sides are heard somehow (even if one side is HUGELY heard,) but I haven’t heard much defense of these points and it’s been getting pretty hyperbolic. Some food for thought, I suppose?
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.
To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.”
Billionaire chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway WARREN BUFFETT, in an op-ed from the August 15, 2011 edition of the New York Times titled “Stop Coddling The Super-Rich.”
Show this to your local Republican / Tea Party-er and watch them have a heart attack.
Also, I wonder if the Wall Street Journal would ever dare publish such a piece.
Like really pissed?
Proof polarization fucks over everything.
I wonder how big the text, how dramatic the music, and how sad the kids would be if the comparisons of the US to Greece really weren’t hyperbole and we were in that deep.