Thread: Obama wants to reform capitalism

While Federal income taxes, and those states that have an income tax have a progressive structure, those are not the entirety of the tax burden faced by citizens. Once you factor in local taxes and sales taxes, and the tax shelters that are available to the rich that are not available to the poor and middle classes, the tax structure is quite regressive. Social Security, since it is capped at the first $95,000 of earned income, is also regressive.

And while you might find it shocking that the richest 5% pays 50% of the actual income tax revenue, while the poorest 50% only pays 4%, should should also be much more strongly shocked (and in the other way) that the richest 5% makes 90% of the income made in the country, and owns at least 90% of its wealth, while the poorest 50% earn less than 1% of the income earned in this country, and own even less than that. In other words, if we had even a flat tax, the richest 5% should be paying much more than they currently do.

And if you think the tax rate on the wealthy has anything to do with economic health, then how do you explain the fact that during the longest sustained period of economic growth in this country, the highest income tax rate on the highest earners (at the time, more than $1 million a year) was 90%? The actual distribution of money has more to do with the presence of jobs and a growing economy than the tax rate, and our current highest tax rate of less that 40% is hardly onerous. Our economy didn't being to suffer serious inflation and slowdown until we started letting monetarist economists (rather than Keynesians) govern the Federal Reserve and we started succumbing to the deregulation and privatization agenda of the descendants of the American Fascist Party and dismantling re-distributive programs of the New Deal, which were barely sufficient as it was.

And it's simply false that the government doesn't create jobs. Counting all federal agencies and the armed forces, the government employs far more people than any private business.

Personally, I believe we should return the tax structure of the 50's, eliminate corporate income tax, and replace the standard income tax deduction with a tax credit worth twice the current standard deduction.

Obama is just like Billary,an unscrupulous hack totally lacking integrity,who will say anything to get themselves elected...that you can be sure of

It is a fact that the average wage earner in the US pays about 50% of what we make to the government, in one form or another. It will not get better only worse because of the number of government workers we have is rising. Canada is far ahead of us in governmental workers and it is reflected in the taxes they pay. The bigger the government the less per worker get done.

Later,
Richard

Obama is not talking about establishing some Socialist Agenda but rather correcting a basic failing of Capitalism. It is the classic Principal-Agent Problem found in just about every Economics 101 textbook.

Manipulating the Principle-Agent problem is exactly what closed the doors on Aurthur Anderson. They lied to investors (principal) in collusion with the CEOs and other executives (agent) basically causing them to lose all credibility in the eyes of investors.

Shareholders (principal) want business they own to make a profit. Spending money on things like excessive CEO pay, private jets, and marble floors (agent costs) means less money going to the Shareholders. So basically, Obama is saying he wants the Shareholders of a company to make more money at the expense of under performing CEOs. I think just about every investor wants that. If you ask me, running a more efficient business so the owners make more money is just about as red blooded American as it gets. It is about time democrats start focusing on helping investors make more money!

The devil is always in the details when it comes to market manipulation but it can be done. We need more people willing to invest in this country and I hope he can make people believe in American business again.

"This time Congress should listen to the slim accountants. The logic behind their thinking is simple: If options aren't a form of compensation, what are they? If compensation isn't an expense, what is it? And if expenses shouldn't go into the calculation of earnings, where in the world should they go?" -Warren Buffet

Originally Posted by adickerson0

Obama is not talking about establishing some Socialist Agenda but rather correcting a basic failing of Capitalism. It is the classic Principal-Agent Problem found in just about every Economics 101 textbook.

Manipulating the Principle-Agent problem is exactly what closed the doors on Aurthur Anderson. They lied to investors (principal) in collusion with the CEOs and other executives (agent) basically causing them to lose all credibility in the eyes of investors.

Shareholders (principal) want business they own to make a profit. Spending money on things like excessive CEO pay, private jets, and marble floors (agent costs) means less money going to the Shareholders. So basically, Obama is saying he wants the Shareholders of a company to make more money at the expense of under performing CEOs. I think just about every investor wants that. If you ask me, running a more efficient business so the owners make more money is just about as red blooded American as it gets. It is about time democrats start focusing on helping investors make more money!

The devil is always in the details when it comes to market manipulation but it can be done. We need more people willing to invest in this country and I hope he can make people believe in American business again.

"This time Congress should listen to the slim accountants. The logic behind their thinking is simple: If options aren't a form of compensation, what are they? If compensation isn't an expense, what is it? And if expenses shouldn't go into the calculation of earnings, where in the world should they go?" -Warren Buffet

The market is self correcting and whenever the government gets involved, with few exceptions, it takes longer for the market to self correct! A crooked market system can not sustain its self! We also have basic laws to take care of crooks.

I just read the story and must say that it is my fervent prayer that God protects this country from the likes of Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton!

I don't think anyone's advocating that government become the only employer or employ the most people. Some jobs government does better than any private industry could. Some services are cheaper nationalized than privatized. Sometimes, choice between providers and products is far more expensive than a lack of choice, and has the unfortunate effect of preventing universal access. This is why we have a federal army, public police and fire departments, and public schools. Private, competing companies that were the only ones to provide those services would be more expensive, and would leave some people out.

Government has long been described as a necessary evil, but the conservative tendency is to focus on it's evilness, ignoring its necessity. They feel that its evil cannot be mitigated or reduced, so they seek to undermine its necessity. Liberals focus on its necessity, often not paying enough attention to its evilness. Often, they feel that its necessity cannot be eliminated or reduced, and so they focus on trying to mitigate its evilness. And just as conservatives, when they come to power, continually reinforce the fact that government is necessary in terms of the results of their policies, so too liberals, when they come to power, reinforce the fact that government is (or can be) evil in terms of the results of their policies. Conservatives allow corruption in private industry and rapacious business practices, liberals allow corruption in government and grow onerous bureaucracies.

Liberals are closer to the truth here than conservatives. Government is necessary, and to a certain extent, this necessity cannot be eliminated. But government also makes demands on its citizens, and that represents a harm and thus an evil to its citizens. So conservatives would be better served by working with liberals to try to lighten the touch of government, find ways for government to provide its necessary services without building such huge bureaucracies, and reduce corruption both within and outside government.

The market is self correcting and whenever the government gets involved, with few exceptions, it takes longer for the market to self correct! A crooked market system can not sustain its self! We also have basic laws to take care of crooks.

Market fundamentalism. If this were true, then conmen, crooks, and fraudsters would never be able to get away with it. The simple fact that they do proves your statement wrong.

Liberals are closer to the truth here than conservatives.

You see this because of your liberal tendencies, however the rest of your statement holds true in my book.
politicians in general are flawed, and ruled by their greed. If I am in power and am in the top 10 percent, then of course I want to gice that top 10% a tax shelter. While Congressman Joe who is in the top 12% wants that shelter to extent 2 more points. Hillary and Obama want to be president not for love of this country, but for love of power. Is McCain any better, I doubt it. but his ideaology is closer to mine, so I will vote for him.
Have you heard the one about Santa Clause, the Tooth fairy, and an honest politician?

My problem with Hillary is intergity, she has none. just what we need, more pardons for sale.
I don't see Obama as any better.

And as for public services, they are necessary, because the government has made us dependent on them. If the government wasn't there, the services would be available, but in a different "format". Again you can chose from 12 of this or a dozen of that.

Originally Posted by Kantian Pragmatist

Market fundamentalism. If this were true, then conmen, crooks, and fraudsters would never be able to get away with it. The simple fact that they do proves your statement wrong.

No, the government protects conmen and the like. They arrest them and give them a trial before letting them go. If the government did not enforce these things, society would be self policing. Justice would be violent, swift, and available to those who could afford it, or those who could defend themselves. Frankly neither situation is good. The only thing preventing criminals from running rampant now is fear. Be it fear of the legal system, or fear of personal injury.

The fact that these con artists get away with crime doesn't prove anything, it simply outlines the inherent flaws in our society.