The Truth About the Economy in 2:15

SS109 wrote: And while the rich's tax rate is lower than before, they provide more revenue to the treasury than the people who earn less, so maybe if the rich need to pay a higher percentage, more of the lower income people need to pay more of their fair share too.

It's the economic lesson of the widow's mite - Mark 12:41-44.

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

The lower and middle class have less, so any increase in their taxes will hurt them proportionally much more than it will a rich person. If you tax the middle class more, then they will have even less money to buy goods and services, which will stifle the economy even further.

If I may, could I ask why you defend the wealthy and oppose increasing taxes on them? There are several of the ultra-rich, like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, who have actually asked to be taxed more by the government.

BearMtnHIB wrote: People like him caused this mess- but you'll never see him take the credit for it- it's some rich guys fault!

I was lucky enough to sit through a few lectures from him - before he was serving Clinton (and political).

Anyone who has seen Reich - knows he doesn't exactly stand for big government.

Seriously, though - he had a solid understanding of economics.

bailey bud wrote: Seriously, though - he had a solid understanding of economics.

Which is what we are missing in government today. We have people making economic decisions based on party ideology rather than sound economics. If there was a way to turn our country over to a panel of economists for a while, rather than our elected politicians, we might have a better chance of digging out of this mess.

Kate wrote:

SS109 wrote: And while the rich's tax rate is lower than before, they provide more revenue to the treasury than the people who earn less, so maybe if the rich need to pay a higher percentage, more of the lower income people need to pay more of their fair share too.

It's the economic lesson of the widow's mite - Mark 12:41-44.

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

The lower and middle class have less, so any increase in their taxes will hurt them proportionally much more than it will a rich person. If you tax the middle class more, then they will have even less money to buy goods and services, which will stifle the economy even further.

If I may, could I ask why you defend the wealthy and oppose increasing taxes on them? There are several of the ultra-rich, like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, who have actually asked to be taxed more by the government.

There is nothing preventing the uber-rich or you from paying more taxes.
So it sounds like Warren Buffet is all talk and no action. I just think Gates sending his money to African charities is a better use of money than the Feds forcing him to pay them to create more bureaucracy like the one that shut down Gibson guitar. Is enforcing a 1907 law about wood exports from other countries a good use of Warren Buffet's money?

And the low tax rate you see on the rich is capital gains taxes, not income taxes. They didn't work hourly to earn that, they put their savings on the line so they should pay a lower task, because they are risking losing it all. You have seen the stock market right? One reason tax receipts are down, the rich aren't earning as much money, 1% or less on savings and losing money in the Dow.

I'm still curious as to why you defend no increase in taxes for the rich?

Kate wrote: I'm still curious as to why you defend no increase in taxes for the rich?

I actually support moderate tax increases on the rich. But it has to be combined with big spending reductions and increase the percentage of people paying income tax.

Economically it would be impossible to balance the budget on the backs of only those earning over 250K like Obama wants.

Even if you confiscated wealth from the rich, it still wouldn't be enough to support the massive spending increases, it has doubled in less than 10 years.

SS109 wrote:

Kate wrote: I'm still curious as to why you defend no increase in taxes for the rich?

I actually support moderate tax increases on the rich. But it has to be combined with big spending reductions and increase the percentage of people paying income tax.

Economically it would be impossible to balance the budget on the backs of only those earning over 250K like Obama wants.

Even if you confiscated wealth from the rich, it still wouldn't be enough to support the massive spending increases, it has doubled in less than 10 years.

Thanks for the response. I agree with you on budget cuts and increase taxes on rich, but not on middle class. I think it would break the back of the fragile economy to tax the middle class more than it is now.