Technically they passed cuts for the richest Americans too since they still get
the tax benefits on their first 250k of income.
All together now, shout it out, pander, pander, pander!!!!
I hope we don't have civil riots, as anger spreads among our citizens. I
never knew success would be treated as criminal activity.
The Bush tax cuts cost America $2 trillion dollars. Would anyone
like to claim they created jobs. I did not think so.
America survives by the middle class. Not the wealthy who need to fabricate
claims like job creator... to hoarde their money even more.
A democrat never met a tax increase they don’t love! What will the
government do with more money? More Solyndra scams, more food stamps, more GSA
parties, more fast and furious cover-ups? Gee, we have to do with less but the
government simply cannot, will not cut spending, wasting our money!
Clever use of semantics. No, the Senate didn't pass a "tax cut"
-- not at all. They voted to keep the CURRENT rates for some people (which
have already been in place for about 10 years).But this vote also
included the RAISING of taxes on millions of small businesses. That's a
bad idea -- hurting the job creators -- but it's an ESPECIALLY bad idea
when the economy is doing so poorly. This tax increase will only
make things worse, so it's obviously not intended to actually help the
economy. Rather, it's part of Obama's
re-distribution/"fairness" ideology, the result of which will be to make
@ MountanmanYou said, "A democrat never met a tax increase they
don’t love!"That's an ironic response to the
Democrats passing a bill to lower everybody's taxes (as atl134 correctly
pointed out, even the top 2% get a break on the income taxes on the first $250k
Mountanman said: A democrat never met a tax increase they don’t love!Well somebody's gotta pay for republican unfunded wars,
prescription plans, and welfare for corporations, you know the little billions
the republicans kept off the books, You know the "deficits don't matter
crowd" well they don't matter until a democrat is president. worf said: I never knew success would be treated as criminal activity.Please explain how removing a temporary tax reduction is treating someone as a
criminal.What is criminal is wealthy corporations demonizing the middle
class for not taking what they are given and liking it.
Increase taxes for all! OR....Decrease taxes for ALL! Just treat everyone
equally. The only fair tax is a flat tax. Libs and Conservatives just
don't get that "Liberty and Justice for ALL", was not created for
one sub-group in our country.
How soon do people forget what 8 years of George W. Bush economic policies have
caused. There will always be corruption in government and inefficiencies. One
thing we can be proud of the Obama administration is the reduction in the war
machine and an attempt to make the middle class stronger. The idea that the rich
create jobs is mostly myth, also the idea that lower taxes lead to economic grow
is also questionable, when entrepreneurs create business they often do not use
their own income, they seek funding from local banks, investment banks,
government backed loans, and vulture capitalist. If there is an opportunity for
someone to make money, they will pursue that activity, our taxes are still low
compared to the developed world and are at a modern day low.
Yes!And if they don't want to be taxed on it, all they
have to do is;1. spend itor2. Invest itEither one of those is the heart & soul, life and blood of our Capitalist
economic system.And I'm getting tired quite frankly of Uncle
Sam being the only one to pump money into a system to keep things afloat while
the Uber-rich Fat-cats do absolutely NOTHING.Republicans LOVE
lecturing us all about "Trickle Down" economics.Show me,
Don't tell me.Having all those $Trillions of dollars horded
away, sitting idle far away in Foreign banks is helping nobody but themselves.
Here is the funny thing. In other articles the liberals would be screaming that
"trickle down" economics doesn't work, and that tax cuts do not
stimulate the economy. Yet here we have liberals pushing for tax cuts that are
a key component of trickle down economics and not one of the usually rabid
liberals is saying anything about how tax cuts and trickle down doesn't
work.If the Bush tax cuts were so wrong, why do liberals keep
extending them? Wouldn't that mean that the tax cuts were the right thing
RedShirt,Tax cuts to the working class do more to stimulate the
economy than tax cuts to the rich--lower the taxes of a working man by $1,000
and he'll turn around and spend an extra $1,000. Lower the taxes of a rich
man by $1,000, and he just has a little more money to save in his Swiss bank
account.Everybody agrees that tax cuts stimulate the economy. The
question is whether they stimulate the economy enough to pay for themselves.
That's where the Republican snake oil comes in--they claim that if the
government doesn't have enough money then the best way to increase revenue
is to lower taxes. As the current economic situation proves, lowering taxes
causes lower revenues.
Eventually tax cuts will need to expire for everybody. The issue is the economy
and who can absorb the increase in taxes now vs later? It is reasonable and
prudent to let the tax cuts expire for upper levels of income, and as the
economy recovers and the unemployment rate decreases then allow tax cuts to
expire for everyone else.
It's the government--not rich people. Let's put the shoe on the right
foot.Take all the money of rich people, it does nothing to lower the
debt.Go live in a country with no rich people and see how you like
it. Begging on the streets is a way of life.
Counter Intelligence Is it only class warfare when you impact rich peoples
taxes, or is it also class warfare when those who make under $112,000 pay FICA
on every dollar they make, and those who make over $112,000 pay FICA on their
earnings up to $112,000.I am amazed that the republicans can create
victims out of those who have prospered the most in this country. The only
thing more amazing is how many people buy into the poor rich people line that
republicans sell. Please don't tell me these people are the job creators,
unless you will admit they are the job creators in China and Indonesia and other
countries that don't pay a living wage. The majority of job creators in
this country are the small business owners who make under $250,000 a year. I
would favor giving the wealthy a tax break on every dollar they put back into
their business and creating jobs, wait a minute, we already do that. Ok I would
be willing to give an even bigger tax break on money that is reinvested in the
economy of this country not the economy of other countries.
Imagine the North Korean government softening up, and giving American rich
people the opportunity to build their businesses there.The standard
of living would greatly improve, and gratitude would abound.It's a shame how we've become a nation of beggars, and whiners,
wondering why we can't be given more from those who succeed.
If both parties argee that the current tax rate for 98% should be maintained why
can't it be done? When Congress can't do what is agreeable to both
sides we're all in trouble.
@Mountanman"A democrat never met a tax increase they don’t
love!"Then why did they just vote to keep 80% of the bush tax
cuts in place when they can just let it all expire Jan 1?"What
will the government do with more money? "Reduce the deficit.
@Redshirt"If the Bush tax cuts were so wrong, why do liberals keep
extending them?"1. We're still not completely recovered so
it'd be a bit burdensome to increase taxes on those at the bottom right
now. 2. The liberal argument against trickle down is that tax cuts for the
rich don't lead to wealth trickling down. It says nothing about tax cuts
for those at the bottom/middle.3. I personally support getting rid of all
the Bush tax cuts for everyone as part of a balanced spending cut/tax increase
proposal to achieve a balanced budget and to me tax rates at Clinton levels seem
to be the most logical level for what is "fair" because that's what
it was the last time we had an essentially balanced budget.
atl134Salt Lake City, UTReduce the deficit?That
could have been done this a long time ago. They would find some good reason to
spend it.Were you joking?
So how does taxing the rich helped the middle class or anyone for that
matter?It appears that the only one getting richer is the
government, and their war on poverty has proven a big disaster.their
increased influence and control in education has made that a disaster as
well.How have the poor and middle call been better off with
increased dependence on government programs?While the hearts of left
may be in right place, their reliance on Big government is horribly misplaced.
Quit calling it the Bush Tax Cuts and start calling it the Obama Tax Increase;
or if you don't like that, the Clinton Tax Increase.I'm
tire of the partisan rhetoric about the rich not paying their fare share when
the poor don't pay any taxes at all, neither do the illegals.How about a percentage of income for EVERYONE----whether you make $2500 or $25
million a year---pay the same 15% and then let all the tax accountants and IRS
folks who make a living see that tax dodgers are punished can get a real job
that produces goods or services.
250,000 of income is really not that much if you're operating a small
business as a sole proprietor with employees. In fact, you're probably
living hand to mouth. But the wise Democrats want to sock it to you anyway
because they only like Government employees or dependents of the Government
employees - which is why we now hear so many ads asking people to enroll in the
SNAP program on the radio. Here's what I don't like- paying
pople for services in cash/check when I know they aren't reporting it as
income. My business does everything by the book reported to the IRS as income
other than roughly 100.00 a year in cash income which goes straight to petty
cash because it's not worth the time and trouble of sitting down to put on
the books. But I don't like paying my fair share when I know other small
businesses aren't which is why I prefer a straight fair consumption tax-
not "value added". And then every time it goes up becuse people want
Government service everyone feels the pain everytime they buy something.
Don't want to pay it? Don't buy anything.
To Hellooo 12:33 p.m. July 26, 2012All together now, shout it out,
pander, pander, pander!!!!--------------------You're right -- that's exactly what Mitt and the far right are
trying to do -- pander to the mega-wealthy to the detriment of everyone else.
Thanks for recognizing the fact.
@toosmartforyou"How about a percentage of income for
EVERYONE----whether you make $2500 or $25 million a year---pay the same 15% and
then let all the tax accountants and IRS folks who make a living see that tax
dodgers are punished can get a real job that produces goods or services."The wealthy would not champion a flat tax rate. Currently, due to the
special interests that politicans have put into our tax code, most wealthy
Americans do not pay anywhere near 35% marginal tax rate. When Romney released
his tax records he paid somewhere in the neighborhood of 14%. The less slightly
less than 50% of Americans pay income tax is a newspaper tag line. Although they
may not pay income tax, they pay sales, property, SSI, Medicaid/Medicare taxes,
so they are paying a form of taxation. Bottom line, the tax code needs to be
streamlined and as equitable as possible for all parties.
@ mcdugallMy point exactly: It's the Income Tax that's
the sticking point. And everyone pays sales tax (yes, even Mitt or the 1% or
the "rich as some call them) along with the other taxes known as
"fees." Tell me, how much "property tax" do the poor pay since
they don't own any property?I agree the wealthy would not like
a flat tax, but neither would those who fall below the line that requires paying
any income tax. That's the beauty of a flat tax---EVERYONE pays the same
percentage and EVERYONE pays the tax. While you may say "well, the rich
can afford it easier than the poor" the point is it's equitable because
everyone pays the same percentage, at least as equitable as you're ever
going to get in taxation. (Sales tax is like that, right?)Who said
anyone shoulds have to pay 35%? I never embraced that idea. It likely came
from someone who pays about 7%, and refers to others, not themselves, as to who
should "pony up.".
"If the Bush tax cuts were so wrong, why do liberals keep extending
them?"a) because they are popular. No one wants to pay more
taxesb) it is a compromise. Check Websters for the definition