Will taxing the rich more solve our country's economic problems or not?  According to this guy it won't help at all.  Your thoughts?  (Note:  This video is about 2011 but what's changed since then? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=JY8LKII_MNA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I don't have to watch the video at all.  YES--the rich need to be taxed more, stock transfers need to be taxed, legalized gambling in the financial field need NOT to be regulated but OUTLAWED, healthcare needs a single payer, military has to be cut back, green energy needs to be developed.  Lets do that first, give it a few years, see where we are, and wash/lather/rinse once again.

The Rich do not create jobs==they invest their money overseas resulting in usa jobs being outsourced.

Just look.  LOOK!!!!!

I'm with bobbo on this. Watching that video will likely only serve to make my blood boil. Certainly the rich need to pay their fair share of taxes. How could it be otherwise? And, high taxes on the rich did not kill the economy in the 1950s and 1960s. At that time, the economy was booming in a way we will likely never see again ... with a top tax bracket in excess of 90% for the entire duration.

Of course, this alone will not likely fix our economy.

Ok, to be fair, I watched the video.
First, it is informative.
Second, it is obvious that your future generation are being morgaged past the point of no return!
Third, this verifys my contention that governments at all levels are out of control, because they spend borrowed dollars to fund current and past programs. If governements at ALL levels were not allowed to borrow money, then they would have to tax less to do the same programs because there would not be interest payments to make on previous borrowings! How to implement this? It requires that WE THE PEOPLE must regain control of our politicians and enforce the rule that all major spending must be authorized by referendum. Sure, it is a foregone conclusion that the emergency situations like WW2 could not be handled this way, but think of it this way, we are still paying for that war, never mind those that have been fought since then! As they say, you can't get out of a hole until you first stop digging!
If you don't like this solution, show us another way that is a viable solution!
[Even though I am a Canadian, living in Canada, this scenerio applies equally up here, too! Same crap, different pile!]
Oh, where would the rich and the savers in our societies be able to invest their money if gov'ts stop borrowing? Well then they would have to invest in the Private Sector, which would force them to do more due diligence on what is worthy of investingin. But the net effect would be far more job creation than we currently could handle, plus government ranks would be greatly diminshed, consultants would have to look for work in the private sector and prove their worth, yada yada....
In fact what I am recommending is a complete metamorphosis of how we organize our public affairs, which given the video, is obviously warranted!

Watch the video you guys.  It may make your blood boil, but it is informative.  I certainly disagree with the video's conclusion that taxing the rich more is a waste of time, however. 

Ken:  How is this video informative if you disagree with its conclusion?  Ha, ha.  OBVIOUSLY you have watched/read/experienced/thought through something else that makes the "information" in this video a hoax?

I already posted what I think needs to be done as a start.  BTW--the 99% needs to be taxed more as well.

FIRST--establish what kind of society you want:  Darwinian or Social Safety Net?  Calcified Social Strata based on accumulated untaxed wealth, or mobility based on individual merit?

THEN--establish the revenue stream necessary to pay for this.

RECOGNIZE--any ongoing debt will ultimately disproportionately fall on the poorer people.

ACCEPT the reality of what you have done.

What will this video inform me on?----specifically?  You act like the readers of this blog have a blank slate to absorb whatever you found valuable===EVEN WHEN YOU DISAGREED WITH IT.

You make little sense.

btw==I think "the issues" are pretty easy to understand and there is a history in front of all of us that is easy to interpret and pretty much beyond dispute absent some failure in character.  Every time I have seen David Cay Johnston speak on this I have found his eloquence and facts I didn't know of interest.  I haven't watched this video, but given the forum, I assume much of what I have seen on the daily talk shows is best said somewhere in the hour:  http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/203225-1

A couple points to think about..

1. TAX them EQUAL if not more..
ALL people need to PAY into the system...ALL of the system, including retirement, EVEN if you arent part of it.  It dont matter if you have YOUR OWN retirement fund, it may not be there when you retire.

2. 1 TAX, not 300 little ones. 'USE' tax sucks, and you pay for it ANYWAY.  JUST take 1/2 my check and SHUT UP..

3. ALL wars are for economic purposes, LET those that WANT IT PAY FOR IT.

4. PAy taxes, and whats LEFT OVER after all the money is spent, can be distributed to Congress and rep..THAT will force them to cut corners.

5. or, BACK to the STIPEND/ALLOWANCE system...CUT them to the CORE..only those that WISH to work FOR the people will want the job.

6. SOMEONE in the gov gets CAUGHT', they GO TO JAIL or WORSE...

FIRST--establish what kind of society you want:  Darwinian or Social Safety Net?

I just want to point out that Darwin warned very strongly against using the principles of natural selection as a form of human society. He recognized that his theory could be erroneously used in this way and strongly advised against it.

I think it is wrong to call such a society Darwinian or even to use the term Social Darwinism for this reason. How about if we coin the term AynRandian and describe Ronald Bonzo Reagan as an AynRandist?

Other than this point, I do largely agree with your post.

Obtuser,

Why is zero debt a goal of yours? Most of us have debt and are better off for it. Would you rather rent a home and have no debt until you can finally save up enough to buy the home than take out a mortgage? If you do so, you will be hemorrhaging money to your landlord the whole time making it much harder to save for the full value of the house as it runs away from you via inflation. Debt can serve a perfectly good purpose and be very helpful.

The trick is to keep the level of debt reasonable.

The U.S. is so far from reasonable at this point that is becomes almost comical if not totally f___ing pathetic. Still though, zero debt would not necessarily be my goal in financial matters. In ecological matters, my opinion might be different. Borrowing the planet's resources from future generations is not a debt that can be paid back, so is actually stealing from one's children to feed oneself. But, that's not really the topic here.

Ken:  How is this video informative if you disagree with its conclusion?  Ha, ha.  OBVIOUSLY you have watched/read/experienced/thought through something else that makes the "information" in this video a hoax?

I already posted what I think needs to be done as a start.  BTW--the 99% needs to be taxed more as well.

FIRST--establish what kind of society you want:  Darwinian or Social Safety Net?  Calcified Social Strata based on accumulated untaxed wealth, or mobility based on individual merit?

THEN--establish the revenue stream necessary to pay for this.

RECOGNIZE--any ongoing debt will ultimately disproportionately fall on the poorer people.

ACCEPT the reality of what you have done.

What will this video inform me on?----specifically?  You act like the readers of this blog have a blank slate to absorb whatever you found valuable===EVEN WHEN YOU DISAGREED WITH IT.

You make little sense.

btw==I think "the issues" are pretty easy to understand and there is a history in front of all of us that is easy to interpret and pretty much beyond dispute absent some failure in character.  Every time I have seen David Cay Johnston speak on this I have found his eloquence and facts I didn't know of interest.  I haven't watched this video, but given the forum, I assume much of what I have seen on the daily talk shows is best said somewhere in the hour:  http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/203225-1

Bobbo,

It's informative in the sense of the saying, "Know your enemy."  In other words, it is always useful to know what the other side is thinking.  That's what I meant.  I understand what the guy in the video was trying to say but I don't necessarily agree with his conclusions.  In fact, I don't.

Well Ken--thats about as helpful as posting a link to a video that was not even watched?  Well maybe not.  An unwatched video might be helpful?  Who knows?

I'm being too negative because there is so much pro Rich propaganda/nonsense on the tube right now what with the Primary news going hot and heavy.  I think we are INUNDATED with evidence as to how idiotic "the other side" is.  "I EARNED all my own money and created thousands of jobs" said the vulture capitalist and he is proud he took EVERY tax adavantage.  He wants the Rich to pay even less in taxes.  I don't need to know my enemy--I need to practice my marksmanship.

I for one am convinced.  Maybe a video on "the best argument to use against the standard bullshit offered by Republican Pukes."  I mean, we all have our own, but its INFORMATIVE to find a well crafted, short, effective counter punch for those idiots.  But to be subjected to more of their dribble?

No thanks.

Obtuser,

Why is zero debt a goal of yours? Most of us have debt and are better off for it. Would you rather rent a home and have no debt until you can finally save up enough to buy the home than take out a mortgage? If you do so, you will be hemorrhaging money to your landlord the whole time making it much harder to save for the full value of the house as it runs away from you via inflation. Debt can serve a perfectly good purpose and be very helpful.

The trick is to keep the level of debt reasonable.

The U.S. is so far from reasonable at this point that is becomes almost comical if not totally f___ing pathetic. Still though, zero debt would not necessarily be my goal in financial matters. In ecological matters, my opinion might be different. Borrowing the planet's resources from future generations is not a debt that can be paid back, so is actually stealing from one's children to feed oneself. But, that's not really the topic here.

Scott, you miss my point plus another that I did not make:
-FIRST, I make a big distinction between PUBLIC EBT and PRIVATE SECTOR DEBT! When I took out a mortgage to purchase our home, it was not a public responsibility, only a personal undertaking. And yes, it was paid off with future earnings.
-SECOND, what I should have included is that PUBLIC DEBT is a method of downloading extra taxation onto the Poorer levels of Society and rewarding the Richer levels with reduced taxation by way of interest payments on their loans, bonds, debentures!
 Make no mistake about the over all effect of zero government borrowing, but taxing at the level required to provide the infrastructure necessary that ALL Citizens approve of by referendum! This would eliminate many pork barrel projects, bridges to nowhere, you name it! Projects that are needed will be approved by internet voting very quickly IMNSHO!
 Government borrowing is a method of negative wealth redistribution, CAPICHE?
And yes, it is also imperative to realign the tax rates into a fair and equitable system that is justifyable to the vast majority of society! Current rates, and exemptions are NOT justifyable, PERIOD!

Well Ken--thats about as helpful as posting a link to a video that was not even watched?  Well maybe not.  An unwatched video might be helpful?  Who knows?

I'm being too negative because there is so much pro Rich propaganda/nonsense on the tube right now what with the Primary news going hot and heavy.  I think we are INUNDATED with evidence as to how idiotic "the other side" is.  "I EARNED all my own money and created thousands of jobs" said the vulture capitalist and he is proud he took EVERY tax adavantage.  He wants the Rich to pay even less in taxes.  I don't need to know my enemy--I need to practice my marksmanship.

I for one am convinced.  Maybe a video on "the best argument to use against the standard bullshit offered by Republican Pukes."  I mean, we all have our own, but its INFORMATIVE to find a well crafted, short, effective counter punch for those idiots.  But to be subjected to more of their dribble?

No thanks.

Bobbio, you missed the perfect follow through!
 It is obvious that those rich who want even less taxation, would eventually demand government subsidization for being rich and supplying the capital for governments to borrow! That is where their GREED is leading to!

Ok--I finally watched the video.  Sooooo irritating at the start, I almost stopped, but it did get more interesting as it went on.  The obvious immediate FRAUD of the video is of course that NO ONE is suggesting we overly tax the rich.  So--you brain storm various scenarios and see what works and what doesn't work and what might work.  You know what doesn't work?  Lowering the taxes on the rich on the notion that they create jobs==aka==trickle down economics.  A PROVEN FAILURE.  Fascile red herring arguments like this one do not inform us at all.

I've heard references to various groups that have pro forma'd a balanced budget over x number of years but i can't find any of them with my limited google search.

There are several simple ideas that make HUGE changes to our economy with no net negative impacts and several with positive impacts depending on your dogma:  legalize and tax prostitution and drugs.  tax stock transfers and sales.  Make purely speculative derivatives illegal.  Same with futures.  Provide Universal Healthcare.  Just these alone might even provide a surplus?  All depends on assumptions and modeling.

What is sure though is that the current "pro rich" lack of taxation policy that USA has been doing for the last 30 years DOESN'T WORK.  Nice experiment but when an experiment fails, you try something else.  High tax countries in Europe are beating the USA on most measurements of concern to average normal people.  Certainly some moves towards their approaches are warranted.

Videos starting with studying hypotheticals that NO ONE is advocating is not a valuable approach.

Obtuser==the Rich already get too many direct subsidies==like farm and ranch subsidies NOT to grow or raise.  Like below cost insurance for their homes built on eroding beaches.  Like no bid contracts for ..... whatever.

There is a huge wealth transfer going on right now from the poor to the rich.  Nothing wrong with actually recapturing some of that fraud.  Sad its the STATE regulators that have to step in and prosecute the Wall Street Criminals.  something I fear Oboma should stand in the dock for and answer.

ITS A GAME...
a big game.
its a way to devalue our money...  make debt a requirement to LIVE..
MAKE more money, keep the money going DOWN..

The problem seems to be that Everything WANTS to keep its value in our nation, except our Wages.

The rich have some protection from this.  In stocks and so forth.
AS the value goes down, it requires something to HOLD the value..(like gold) that goes up and SEEMS to be worth MORE, but isnt.  it HOLDS a specific point of reference.  Gold/oil and many products have a specific VALUE...force more money on the market, and the prices go up..

THIS includes the stock market, and what happened, in 1999, to FORCE the market over 10,000(?)..

WAGES didnt go up..except at the TOP.,

FOR some reason, we are INFLATING value, and its FAKE.
Corps hate having a market LOWER or plateau...they want INCREASE.  and the gov. has been PUSHED to see this also.
I said it before..WHAT education do you need to work in the GOV..NONE.