Ben Carson (Page 2)

Well, if you bothered to pay attention to the meaning of the video, it's about taking responsibility, working hard, not making excuses, and expecting more from our people. I do not know what exactly the right number is for taxation. If you are already living off the government, not sure how you pay taxes. If there truly was a flat tax and no loopholes or deductions, then that would be a start. If there needs to be some sort of progression, then I could accept that to a point. but don't yap about "fair share", when it is anything but.

You can say all you want about how bad the gap is between rich and poor... but our system of government instituting policy to perpetuate an entire victim class, and tell them that we expect nothing from them because they have had it too hard.... to me that is one of the biggest injustices this country has ever perpetrated.

I think the point you continue to neglect is he DOES pay a LOT more in taxes than the struggling mom with 3 kids.  Phil earned an estimated $60M in 2012 with winnings/endorsements.  On that revenue he paid an estimated $30M in taxes in 2012.  When the fiscal cliff deal and new state laws went into effect on Jan 2013 his tax rate went up an additional 7.9%.  His "little more" in taxes is almost $5M in addition to the $30M he's already paying.  That is bleeping insane dude and there's nothing you can do to convince me this is acceptable or "fair".  Oh and btw, all of his extra money that "he'll never miss" combined with all the other tax increases doesn't even go to the debt at all, it all went to new spending so now we need to tax him even more, and more, and more, and more because he can afford it.

Also, I would say that most folks do agree with you but it's not because it's right, it's because they've been conditioned (aka brainwashed) for decades that it's OK to steal from the rich because they can afford it.

Ya, and the tax the rich crowd holds up what used to be the 90% tax rate on the rich as the shining example of how the rich should be taxed. Because it was so right and just back then.

...or, maybe, just maybe, that older generation lived through a period of time in which the poor suffered greatly (a Depression), and they learned something from that experience.

Vs what Kennedy learned when he lowered those tax rates and increased tax revenue?

But Kennedy is a crazy right wing Tea Party type by today's standards. 

What? They lived through a depression and learned that the rich turning over 90% of their income was a good thing?

You are incorrect.  The top marginal tax rate was once 90%.  They were not required to turn over 90% of their income.  Nice try though.  

I think it's obvious we disagree on the progressive nature of our tax system.  You view it as stealing from the rich to give to the poor, and I view it as a protective control mechanism that helps to ensure the rich don't walk off with all the wealth.  We all know money makes money, and more money makes more money, a progressive tax helps protect the middle class...and in a way, helps the upper class as well considering their businesses can't operate without customers.

btw, I wouldn't say "brainwashing" has allowed the progressive tax system to last since FDR, it has more to do with the fact before the tax system was "progressivized," the non-progressive tax structure helped lead us all into something called the Great Depression.

Hey Powerman, "if you bothered to read any of my posts," you'd notice I never once (nor has the president) ever disagreed with the portion of your post I bolded high above.  The portion I bolded low above is your opinion...one in which you are entitled to whether it's true, or, as I believe it to be, false.

dang it, I thought I was swaying you...

I'm genuinely trying understand your point of view, but I just don't see it the same way you do I guess.  I'll give you a little anecdote (myself) I started a company in 2009.  I paid myself virtually nothing for the first year and wiped out my savings and ended up 6 months behind on my mortgage and fell into foreclosure.  In the first hint of trouble employees would abandon ship in a heartbeat but I stuck it out.  I am now four years into my company and becoming very profitable to the point that I'm able to pay myself more than I used to make before I started my business.  My house, my cars, my furniture, my everything is leveraged to the hilt to secure my business.  If we make it (and all signs are good) and in five years or so I get to the point where I'm making over $1M a year you feel that I have no right to keep the money that I've risked everything for "because I can afford it" and I will "walk off with all my wealth" and harm the middle class?  I'm sorry, but in my world that is simply the most ridiculous logic I can imagine.  Not directing at you personally, just the philosophy.

Like I said, I just cannot understand punishing success and using the proceeds to encourage those that don't succeed to continue to not succeed.  To me, that is hurting the middle class.

Also, on the great depression; nice try.  Try looking east to Germany and the Treaty of Versailles.  Lets just say it involved printing/borrowing a lot of money, inflation, and collapse.

So then what was the great lesson they learned about a progressive tax sytem from the great depression.

And like every politician... he talks out the side of his neck. He says the right thing, but his actions are what I watch. I have watched him balme Bush for 6 years. I have watched him blame Wall Street, the rich, and the TEA party every chance he gets. I see him blame Republicans for his complete ineffectivness as a leader. Excuses, excuses, excuses.

There are plenty of hard working rich and poor. There are plenty of people scamming the sytstem rich and poor. It isn't governments job to pick the winners...it's their job to level the playing field, and enforce the laws of the land. President Obama is all about picking his personal winners. He is most certainly about pushing class warefare and a victim class in this country. He is most certainly about continuing the staus quo and encouraging the divide in this country.

But ya.... he says he want to work together, so it must be true.

Tony, I wouldn't dream of swaying you...for some reason I just love dropping into the lion's den.   

Re:  the bolded line above, I never said you, "have no right to keep the money you risked everything for."  I have said I believe you should be expected to at least pay the same amount of taxes someone would have paid prior to the Bush tax cuts that lowered the marginal tax rate on the highest-earning Americans to the lowest level post-Great Depression.

I totally understand your point of view.  I've got acquaintances that do quite well for themselves...and honestly, most are on your side of the debate.  That's cool.  I don't agree with ya'll, but we can agree to disagree.

I'll just let it be known that had your business not succeeded, and you ended up penniless and unable to feed/clothe/house your family, I support a strong safety net that would have been there to get you and your fam through the tough times.  I guess you could always refuse the benefit, but I'd feel better knowing you and your fam had that opportunity.

On the Great Depression, of course there were a multitude of causes...but denying severe wealth inequity was a factor runs counter to many historians.

Don't get me wrong, the far Left has some ideas I don't agree with.  Free cell phones?  Food choice with food stamps??  Those sound like hooey to me.  Cheap grade D anti-starvation foodstuffs is the way to go in my opinion.  As is making an example out of those that cheat the system. (btw, that's not just welfare recipients, it should also include those who cheat the IRS everyday working "under the table," as well as upper class tax cheats)

Same goes for me. My dad worked construction and it was feast or famine. One winter I had one pair of JCPenny jeans to wear and that was it. Of course I was made fun of for only having one pair of pants. We lived on chicken and potatoe soup. At 15 I lied to work at a new grocery store that opend in the sticks. Minimum wage was $3.10, and my father had to ask me for my $60 paycheck to put food on the table. But my parents never took a penny of government assistance. We worked hard, and we earned our money.

I too believe in a country as rich as our that there should be a safety net. That we should offer a "hand up, not a hand out". If you are not disabled, there should be a limit to how long you can get it. It is flat out wrong to have multiple generations on welfare. It just is, and you will never convice me otherwise. If you are disabled, you should be taken care of. For those that need it, we should provide it.

Arguing about the tax rate on the rich is complete horse hockey. The tax code is so riddled with holes, it is completely meanigless. To argue what somebody paid 80 years ago to today is equally meaningless. The bolded sentence above, and your argument of taking more from the rich, implies that they have too much money, and it should be taken to decrease the "gap". Again, horse hockey. At this point in the game, if there was indeed a flat tax imposed on all income without any loop holes... the rich would indeed be paying a crap ton of money. More than they are now.

To just give an example... if we did a 10% flat tax, but exempt the first $15K, $30K for joint, and gave a $5K deduction per dependent... and say cap it at 2 or 3 total.... then the effective tax rates would indeed be progressive and help those on the bottom. The rich would be paying much more than they are now, but it would be a "fair" system. I could even get on board with a somewhat progressive rate... no deductions or loop holes, but 20% for top 10% say. But it is ludicris to say the rich "deserve" to fork over 40-50-60% of their income and anything less is not "fair" when half the country does not pay taxes due to deductions and credits. Not welfare recipients, but working families that pay no taxes due to credits and deductions. That is simply unsustainable.

The point of the guys speech was to take responsibility, stop making excuses, and stop looking for a hand out. We are not in the mess we are in because the rich are not paying enough. We will not fix the mess we are in by making the rich pay more. The American people need to pay more, and recieve less. We need to stop spending more than we bring in. It will take every American to turn this around, not just the richest ones. A flat tax is not that crazy, it can be done right. Or a consumption tax if you want. I'm less thrilled with a VAT tax.... but the bottom line is, it does not matter what our tax system is, the American people can't continue to expect so much for so little in the new global economy and think we are going to forever expand our economy and be prosperous.