My fault for the confusion, but a big part of what I mean when I say 'the rich' is businesses and businessowners. Taxing them leads to less investment of the company in growth because it isn't safe. If those kinds of taxes are relaxed, job growth will go up because it's safe for these businesses to do so. That way, the rich may indeed get richer (a phrase a lot of people hate because they ignore the second part) while the less wealthy also benefit from the market balancing itself out (since monopolies are banned, thank goodness), as well as gain job openings.

Except I've provided studies. So, yeah... I was hoping you'd look it up, but okay.
Site dump;

That was never my goal, if it's yours, same deal.

Relax champ, cause my point is that a thriving middle class is what's good for the country. Not saying give free stuff to everyone. Let's try to actually comprehend what people are saying and not just throw random **** next time?

Mom and Pops are amazing, especially if they thrive. If that's what you're referring too, but the bigger ones are eating through the smaller ones. That needs to change.

Not everyone who owns a business is rich.
Also, this doesn't work out. We can't tax the middle class or poor, because to obtain a significant amount of money from those two we would need to drain their money, say, 60% tax (just a guess). This would hurt the middle class extremely badly, as most aren't in the position to give up 40% more of their earnings.
Michael Moore: "The richest 1 percent have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined." Realistically, they're the only people the government can tax without them becoming broke.
But if not people, why not companies?
Alright, corporate tax is the way to go.

Business growth =/= job growth.
Demand = need for supply = job growth.

How does this work? Money isn't infinite. Where does the money come from for the rich? The poor would only get poorer, and the rich richer, dividing the economy even more. How does the market balance itself out?


EDIT: Something interesting:
http://cdn.gobankingrates.com/wp-con...view-graph.jpg
Source

RIP cher

Woah goat, didn't see that coming!

oh it's fake? I didn't look into it too much, my bud just told me about it. I feel stupid haha.

Bump...
Ghetto you know im as liberal as they come but Trump would be a great republican president. A lot of people don't like Obama now. Politically I'm indifferent. He's socially hilarious though compared to other presidents... Me? I'm voting for trump.

Personally, I think Trump could win (the GOP nomination), although unlikely. A lot of people like to brush him off as being a 'joke candidate'. I can tell you now, watching Trump is like watching Obama when he first started. Very TV friendly and charismatic especially when you compare him to the other candidates (Jeb Bush, man he is not a people person). It probably comes from the years of being in the spotlight.

He is doing everything right. The media is working for him (last I checked he had only spent 2 million on his campaign) and he has a strong rhetoric that appeals to the Republican base. Latest thing he has done which really will boost his popularity is distance himself from Super PACS which really should appeal to the Center voting base.


Yuck. Hillary is one of the biggest hypocrites currently in politics let alone running for president.

>is in top 1%

>constantly complains about the 1%

I heard a classmate say, 'I hope Hillary gets it because she's a girl!'

I cringed and thought about what would of happened if I, or anyone else, had said, 'I hope Cruz gets it because he's a man'.

She also seems to enjoy flouting the fact that she is a woman. Her campaign should be, "Vote for me, I am a girl!"

If I supported the Democrats (I do not), I could not comprehend supporting the woman who denounces the rich but takes money from high profile donors in the same breath.

That being said, I think Clinton will (sadly) be our next president at this current time as the EC favors the Democrats and since Biden is not running, she will easily take the DNC nomination.

Are you suggesting we open the borders? That is just silly. Don't get me wrong, come here legally and I have no problem with immigration. Crossing the border is just unfair to those who come here properly.

If you're a Libertarian you should be supporting Rand Paul.

I do not think you understand what a conservative is. I hope you don't think the whole Republican party are conservatives.

Trump is a horrible economic conservative, considering he supports a single player health care system. I think he could pass off as a moderate on economic issues.

Socially, you could argue either way. Little is known on his stance on Gay Marriage, except for the fact that he denounced that Kentucky clerk for not following the 'law of the land'. On abortion, he has switched sides from pro abortion to pro life. But, he has always supported stricter gun control. So, once again, Trump is probably center-moderate socially.

I think calling Trump a conservative monster is empty rhetoric.

I won't even try to argue your point about conservatives being 'monsters' as

1. It is subjective

and

2. You have proven you do not know what a conservative actually is.

Do you just binge watch MSNBC?

Trump outlined plans to cut all taxes on those who earn less than 50,000. No way can that 'hurt the economy' it will literally fuel it.

More money in a person's pocket= More fuel for the economy. Economics 101.

How can a business grow without supply and demand? That is the exact way a business grows, which means your equation is better put like:

Demand= Business growth = job growth.

Because it is true, when businesses grow jobs must grow with them. The cause of a business growing is demand for a product.

Tax breaks for small businesses would help that, whilst a minimum wage of fifteen dollars would be detrimental.

Did you just suck Trump's ****? I can make stupid remarks too. :D

Yes, he'll slash the rates for everyone, but you cannot just look at one part of his overall plan. His plan will hurt the economy, not in the way you're assuming with these cuts.

His desire to slap tariffs on foreign imports, which is how he's planning on funding this plan, will increase the costs of domestic goods. He's going to start a trade war and it's going to hurt. His math doesn't work.

Much like how the constitution needs to change with time, so does the minimum wage. You cannot just say "This is what the wage will be, and forever shall be." and expect it to work out.

You're too far gone, I was right when I said you binge watch MSNBC. You have no concept of anything.

I do not know why you think less tax on the rich is a bad thing. It has been proven to fuel economic growth in the Reagon era already.

Tarrifs with low tax brackets would actually be a good thing, much like a GST would work wonders on this country if it is implemented.

The consititution was not made to be amended, so your analogy is flawed. Needing 2/3 of states + 2/3 of congress to agree on something is a near impossible feat. Wages will increase like everything else does, but if you really need government intervention you do not raise it to fifteen dollars overnight. That would destroy small business.

Blimey. Those sure are some long posts.

Really, I'm too far gone? I think I'm pretty grounded compared to you.

What taxes do they currently have? They've became richer in the past decade from all the breaks and loopholes. Like, holy ****, are you really in this much denial?

Those tariffs are going to start a trade war, that trade war is going to throw us back into a state I'd rather not see again.

Article 5 of the Constitution wants to speak with you, It wants to tell you that you're ****ing wrong. You're right, it is a near impossible feat in todays government because they're all paid off by corporations and the rich. Change has to start somewhere.

The minimum wage should be the minimum amount of what a person needs in order to live. That is not the case today. Does it need to change? Yes. Does it need to change often? No.

They've became richer from creating wealth for themselves, yes. The USA Is the only country in which companies are charged corporation tax for profits they make overseas, that is what needs to change. I do not blame a company such as Apple from hiding their taxes abroad, it is not ours. But, if we stopped taxing them for profits made overseas (or even just lowered the rate altogether), they'd bring that money back and spend it on jobs, infastructure and technological development that would help us all.

I agree with you, loopholes should be closed. Our 800 paged tax code will be the place to start. Trump knows first hand how easy it is to dodge taxes, and it seems he has plans to change it. http://http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-26/donald-trump-says-he-wants-to-raise-taxes-on-himself

Tariffs- No substance once again. Clearly told you that, like a GST, tariffs would not be as detrimental as you say. You must also think our sales tax is bad. By the sounds of your ignorance, I'm sure you support Bernie Sanders, he probably wants tariffs raised too.

Constitution- changed just 17 times in the past 250 years. Any chance you get to blame something on the rich though, truly funny. Moreover, how does the article need to speak to me? I clearly affirmed the fact of how hard it is to change the constitution as dictated by the article you speak of. I think you are the one that needs to understand that the constitution was not made to be amended.

Minimum wage, once again, can and does change with the market. Both Denmark and Germany does fine without one.

Stop swearing, it is unneeded and childish.

What if Hilary and Trump ****ed? That'd be kinda neato.

Their baby would be Jim Webb