Advertisement

llama726

Follow

Comment history

Tax the Rich and the Corporations – The Hard Math

Where have I ever argued that cuts aren't needed?

August 10, 2011 at 8:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Tax the Rich and the Corporations – The Hard Math

"Now we can tax corporations. We currently tax between 15 and 35% - the latter the second highest in the industrial world."

Corporations pulled in $1.659 trillion in 3rd Quarter of 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/bus...

We taxed corporations in a year for 12% of what they profited in a quarter. A 15% annual rate isn't accurate, or even close to accurate. Assuming corporations profited only $4 trillion last year overall, even taxing corporate taxes at a flat 25% would bring in one trillion dollars.

Instead of increasing marginal tax rates, solely, we should probably do away with loopholes, more gentle taxes on stocks and dividends, etc.

Nah. Let's just blame Obama. Good call.

August 9, 2011 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

There are many, many, MANY more miles of print about academic results. Sometimes, issues have more layers than what you see directly on top, champ.

August 9, 2011 at 2:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

"We pay higher taxes because the schools feed the kids..."

You pay higher taxes because the government is unwilling to roll back cuts made for those who are much, much wealthier than you. The same people who are engineering the standardized test movement you've complained about. The same people who have dictated that the talking point be about how things cost more now, the same people

Kids need adequate nutrition to learn and develop. Anyone who has taken an introductory psychology class could tell you that. If you are a parent who can take care of your kids, take care of your kids. You control the 16 hours a day your kid is with you. The other 8 are at the school. It's better for your kid if the other kids are doing well in his or her school. You have an investment in their success (as does society).

August 9, 2011 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

Whose responsibility? That's on your kid, or kids. And you should help them become responsible enough to do that.

But that has nothing to do with the question above. Apples and oranges. Just as the school sees your children for 7-8 hours per day during the school year - it's not your responsibility to make sure they are being taught math. That's on the school that agrees to teach them.

August 9, 2011 at 2:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

Very true. But we are preparing them for a reality in the working world, where many entry-level positions do not afford more than thirty minutes for lunch. It's an indictment of our society. Perhaps we need to free up some time - not just for kids - because we should be leading by example.

August 9, 2011 at 2:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

Thank you for this utterly useless stereotype. Poor people sometimes have more than one kid. Good work. They also have less education (less sex education), less access to birth control, and a smaller amount of resources. They aren't able to go get abortions if they get pregnant because they're more likely to be religious. There are so many more nuances and complexities. If a person can't afford to FEED the children they have, they should stop having kids. Great work. And if they could feed their kids until they lost their jobs two years ago, then what? They should have put more in savings? Not my problem? That's what our whole country has become. "It's not my problem." It's about to be everyone's problem.

But, by all means. It's because they have too many kids. That really helps us now, like Katara says below, that the kids are already here.

August 9, 2011 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

I think I know your template.

<Emotional Opinion> <Long and rather pointless anecdote which is supposed to be taken as overwhelming evidence and used to decide policy and demonstrates a lack of understanding of circumstances outside of worldview> <Appeal to bizarre sense of reason conferred by lengthy anecdote> <Opinion>

August 9, 2011 at 1:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

I'm glad that you are wealthy enough and / or work a flexible enough job to be able to stay home and educate your child. That's not reality for most people.

August 9, 2011 at 1:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Who is most responsible for ensuring public school children eat a healthy lunch?

"Well, I love kids, but don't take my money via taxes to pay for some kids lunch, especially if they are here illegally."

Take mine. Don't take mine to fight a war I don't agree with. Far more of my dollars went to that last year than to feeding a kid. And guess what? Good for you for your generosity. But not everyone is so generous. Most people aren't. And even those that are, you have to hope that someone is nice enough to take their money and give it to a charity that cares enough to come to Kansas. Or hope that Kansans are generous enough. And it's not nearly as effective (I know, government inefficiency, etc) as simply having the government distribute it.

I don't care about your racism. Good for you for standing up against horrible illegal immigrants by wanting for their kids to go hungry.

August 9, 2011 at 1:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )