Comments on: California, harbinger of hard U.S. choices http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: jjones444 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-34053 Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:20:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-34053 I think California of all states needs to be careful about the financial decisions that are made there. The whole country has its eyes on California all the time, so they should be more careful about financial decisions. There really is no “right or wrong” answer when economic times are as tough as they are right now. http://www.ocresidentialservices.com/

]]>
By: Tim E http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-16065 Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:38:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-16065 RE: Rich Paying More Taxes,
website taxfoundation .org states the rich filers pay a large precentage of total tax collected. This is true. The big lie they leave out is what is the EFFECTIVE tax rate for these individuals. With an account of minor skills these folks pay a smaller percentage of their wealth to taxes than the working class who cannot afford tax free munis, booking losses on stocks, depreciation on business, etc. They pay a larger percentage of the total tax collected because they control a much larger percentage of the wealth. Much of that wealth is tax free or taxed at a lower rate. taxfoundation.org cannot dispute the concentration of wealth to the small top percentage of people. Another organization built on lies, damm lies and statistics. You see who’s bailing out the brightest financial minds in the world who didn’t know what they were doing?

]]>
By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15827 Sat, 30 May 2009 14:13:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15827 I agree Jim. Money is a tool that if used correctly can aid our survival and extend to us through hard work and discipline many comforts. It also if used wisely can enable a society to build that which it needs to prosper. Our political leaders unfortunately see money differently. It is used by politicians to coerce, bribe, extort and manipulate our society in there attempts to remain in power. Most politicians today care not who pays the bill for they defer that to future generations.

Thomas Jefferson stated that those who charge future generations to pay for what we would use today “commit a larceny against futurity”. He also stated “From time to time the tree of liberty must be replenished with the blood of patriots and tyrants”. Is debt assigned to many without their consent not enslavement?

]]>
By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15825 Sat, 30 May 2009 13:57:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15825 Drewbie I stated that only through law can money be directed through society. This is why the government can seize money from an illegal enterprise should they find out about it. What does robbing a bank have to do with this discussion? As the American citizens are technically sovereign what there government chooses to do regarding taxation is done so by consent through the electoral process. If we are unhappy with government policy, one option is to replace representatives through the vote. John Locke spells out other measures to bring change that he claims are among the “Rights of Man”.

]]>
By: Jim http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15763 Fri, 29 May 2009 19:37:44 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15763 Anubis:

I think you are reading too much into the statement by either me or Josef, but I understand your point: Life is not fair. However, I was rebutting the inference by Josef that the “rich” do not currently pay their fair share. Josef was not bemoaning the unfair pain felt by families of innocents killed in war, or the inherent unfairness of losing a child or parent to cancer. Note the focus of Josef’s first sentence refers to anti-tax initiatives, not cancer and war. Josef seems to be saying that he believes that we (or rather, the government) should raise taxes on the rich to make them pay even more. A flat tax would be fair, but life is not fair so instead we have our current progressive taxation system where the “rich” are forced to pay far more than a pro-rata share. Hence, my comment to Josef.

I understand your point about the need for a willingness to sacrifice for the common good and agree with you to a point. I submit, however, that too many folks in this country do not pay any amount of taxes and yet somehow still get a “refund”. Where’s their sacrifice? How can they receive a tax refund if they pay no tax? Regarding sacrifice on a population-wide level, I feel our generation (I’m 42) and the younger generations are oten too short-sighted, too self-centered and not willing to make a sacrifice, unless they can sacrifice something of little value. Better yet, we are more likely to want to tell someone else to sacrifice. Josef’s comment sounded to me like a bit of jealousy or sour grapes concerning the rich.

While we’re talking about taxation and fairness, is it fair for so many of Obama’s appointees to have such an aversion to paying their taxes? These are our leaders, the people who make the rules for the rest of us to follow. Unfortunately, we do not get the pass, the mere slap on the wrist that so many of the current administration’s employee’s seemed to get in terms of avoiding meaningful legal consequences of ignoring the law. Again, I know, Life is Not Fair. Still, it smacks of hypocrisy or hubris, of an entitlement to somehow be above the law to see so many politicians so willing to try to boldly cheat the system.

Yes, Anubis, there are more things in life more important than money. Family, friends, fun and home come to mind. But since I must work to support my family, and I must pay my taxes, I expect others to do the same if they are able to do so. But, to choose not to work (as many do) and then to expect to be taken care of (as many do), that is not acceptable. One can choose not to work. That is their choice. But aren’t they then responsible for the outcome, for the consequences of that choice?

Regards,

Jim

]]>
By: Drewbie http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15711 Fri, 29 May 2009 15:31:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15711 Anubis-
Money may be made by the government, but that does not mean that all US dollars belong to every US citizen. Steal some from a bank and try using that arguement in court.

]]>
By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15699 Fri, 29 May 2009 14:38:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15699 Jim, there is no such thing as fair. That is a concept we teach children playing school sports and exercising privileges. The don’t seem to learn it either.

Some would say it is not fair that many families lose a parent to disease. violence or accident. Others would say it is not fair that some can afford to go to college while other just as capable people cannot. Is it fair that innocent women, children and elderly are killed by innocent bombing in war.

For society to work all must make sacrifices. Some far more than others. For the rich to give up much of the money they earn is small compared to the sacrifice a family endures when a loved one is lost in war serving his or her country. Surely there are more important things in life than money?

]]>
By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15693 Fri, 29 May 2009 14:22:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15693 Drewbie, money is by definition a social construct. It is also the property of the United States. It is not ours. As such, all U.S. dollars belong to the American people no matter whose hands they rest in. Only through law can the money be funneled and channeled. If we wish money to be privatized then we should all mint our own out of gold with our likeness on it as did Egyptian, Roman, and Persian emperors and pharohs.

]]>
By: Patrick http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15661 Fri, 29 May 2009 02:48:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15661 San Francisco has brought Sacramento to it’s knees (and didn’t offer to pay the bill). What else is there to say?

]]>
By: Drewbie http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/05/27/california-harbinger-of-hard-us-choices/#comment-15585 Thu, 28 May 2009 17:44:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3725#comment-15585 Barbara-
“I think that with all the millions made by the Hollywood stars, that they should put back into the economy of their state rather than around the world.”

The reason they make so much money is because they have demanding jobs (away from their homes months at a time, no private life, etc) and because their product earns that much money. You have no more right to tell them where to spend their money than they to tell you to spend your paycheck at a local grocer instead of walmart.

]]>