• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Say They’re Open to ‘Revenue Raisers’

Cutting entitlements from democratic base is a lot more of a sacred cow than cutting tiny pecks of defense spending, when half of the current republican caucus probably doesn't even care about military (tea party)

LOL that is really funny. So you are saying the GOP has no excessive spending or government programs that it uses to buy votes. John Boehner thanks you.
 
I find it disgusting that we have a system where a bunch of people can vote up the taxes of a minority and pay no tax increases themselves. If we have a flat tax that would not be possible because if you want the rich to pay more you will have to pay more yourself

Are you actually advocating for a flat tax AGAIN?
 
more hyperbole. tone it down my friend, its getting silly.

sort of like automatic pistols? Its not hyperbolic

it was noted by men far wiser than you and I that a democracy fails once the public realizes it can vote itself the contents of the public treasury.

think about that for a while
 
LOL that is really funny. So you are saying the GOP has no excessive spending or government programs that it uses to buy votes. John Boehner thanks you.

Yeah, on what, Boehner's tobacco subsidies? Who gives a ****. Those having nothing to do with our debt crisis. Democrats, stop trying to look like you are devoted to cutting spending by cutting low income heating assistance. Republicans, stop thinking the world is ending because you are voting to end corn subsidies.
 
Are you actually advocating for a flat tax AGAIN?

yeah so ten people who pay no taxes cannot elect someone to raise the taxes on the one guy who funds all of the government services for that ten.

being a government employee you don't like that I am sure. But we who pay far more than we use do

and we love the fact that it prevents ten non taxpayers from suffering nothing when they want more tax hikes
 
Yeah, on what, Boehner's tobacco subsidies? Who gives a ****. Those having nothing to do with our debt crisis. Democrats, stop trying to look like you are devoted to cutting spending by cutting low income heating assistance. Republicans, stop thinking the world is ending because you are voting to end corn subsidies.

We will put you down as one of the reasons for the problem rather than someone supporting a real solution which means real spending cuts
 
Its not hyperbolic..

comparing being torn from your family in Africa, starved on a slave-ship for weeks or months, then sold like a piece of meat into a lifetime of hard labor with brutality and cruelty........ to paying an extra 3% in Federal income tax, is NOT hyperbole???

:lol:
 
comparing being torn from your family in Africa, starved on a slave-ship for weeks or months, then sold like a piece of meat into a lifetime of hard labor with brutality and cruelty........ to paying an extra 3% in Federal income tax, is NOT hyperbole???

:lol:

Yes, actually. It is, of course. It's a form of Godwinism, I should think.
 
We will put you down as one of the reasons for the problem rather than someone supporting a real solution which means real spending cuts

Real spending cuts are cutting entitlements, taking a hard look at defense spending (like the stuff our corrupt congressmen, on both sides of the aisle, appropriate when the DoD doesn't even want/need it) killing subsidies and loopholes, and lowering tax rates. Real spending cuts are not cutting discretionary spending and making federal agencies work with even less. How much of the federal budget pie is discretionary spending again???? 12-16%, fluctuating. That is NOTHING. Can some of it be cut, sure. Is it going to make a difference? NO. They are easy little things that can be cut so the politicians can go home and say they are budget hawks.
 
We will put you down as one of the reasons for the problem rather than someone supporting a real solution which means real spending cuts

So?? If Bush had a budget surplus and cut taxes.. And now we have a deficit, why isn't restoring Clinton levels of taxes the right thing to do??

I mean?? We lost over 8 million jobs.. So you can't claim it is the jobs.. What is the big deal here with making the rich pay their fair share?? Are you all on the take or something?? Do you enjoy having your lips firmly planted on the butts of big oil and big business??

Your solution isn't the real solution and never will be.. As long as you deny the reason we got into this mess in the first place.. Tax cuts and increase spending.. Meaning the wars.. So we need to cut spending on defense and raise taxes.. Anyone with gradeschool math could tell you that..
 
So?? If Bush had a budget surplus and cut taxes.. And now we have a deficit, why isn't restoring Clinton levels of taxes the right thing to do??

I mean?? We lost over 8 million jobs.. So you can't claim it is the jobs.. What is the big deal here with making the rich pay their fair share?? Are you all on the take or something?? Do you enjoy having your lips firmly planted on the butts of big oil and big business??

Your solution isn't the real solution and never will be.. As long as you deny the reason we got into this mess in the first place.. Tax cuts and increase spending.. Meaning the wars.. So we need to cut spending on defense and raise taxes.. Anyone with gradeschool math could tell you that..

Under Bush, 3 million jobs created. Clinton, 23 million. Making the wealthy pay more really does destroy the economy right??
 
comparing being torn from your family in Africa, starved on a slave-ship for weeks or months, then sold like a piece of meat into a lifetime of hard labor with brutality and cruelty........ to paying an extra 3% in Federal income tax, is NOT hyperbole???

:lol:

stop the fibs

its far more than 3%


a 3% rate raise on a tax rate of 36% is more like a ten percent increase in the tax bill

people who have saved and invested and retired from work are looking at a 100% increase in taxes or more if they have mainly dividend income. My uncle worked his butt off in the advertising business. He was one of the first people in television and did well. In 1979 he sold his business to take care of my aunt who was dying of smoking related cancer. he invested all of that -save for what he spent on experimental (and unsuccessful) cancer treatments. So at age 55 he was living off of dividend income.
Some of that income was taxed twice-first at the corporate profit level then when it came to him. Obama and many of his followers want to raise taxes on dividends for someone like my late uncle from 15% to 39.6%

do the math
 
taxes are not theft. not unless you are a Libertarian/Militia/Survivalist/Freemen-on-the-land kinda guy.

They are. Wealth redistribution which is what democrats do is theft. We should not be 14 trillion in debt. If we raise the debt ceiling the democrats will just keep spending and wanting more of our hard earned money.
 
Real spending cuts are cutting entitlements, taking a hard look at defense spending (like the stuff our corrupt congressmen, on both sides of the aisle, appropriate when the DoD doesn't even want/need it) killing subsidies and loopholes, and lowering tax rates. Real spending cuts are not cutting discretionary spending and making federal agencies work with even less. How much of the federal budget pie is discretionary spending again???? 12-16%, fluctuating. That is NOTHING. Can some of it be cut, sure. Is it going to make a difference? NO. They are easy little things that can be cut so the politicians can go home and say they are budget hawks.

Don't be confused here.. Descretionary spending or SS and Medicare are small potatos when it comes to the budget.. They are both paid with their own tax and are not usually even counted on the main budget unless it is to fund something extra.. The same reason the post office isn't on the budget.. The pust office is also self funded.. So cutting Medicare and SS will also do nothing.. Check your own pay stub if you don't believe me..
 
its all over the news my friend. I shouldn't have to do this work for ya.

If you claim it then show it. If it is all over the news it should only take you a minute
 
They are. Wealth redistribution which is what democrats do is theft.

so call the police. ;)

funny thing is, under no state criminal code, are taxes considered theft. not even in the most Libertarian state, are taxes considered theft.
 
Last edited:
So?? If Bush had a budget surplus and cut taxes.. And now we have a deficit, why isn't restoring Clinton levels of taxes the right thing to do??

I mean?? We lost over 8 million jobs.. So you can't claim it is the jobs.. What is the big deal here with making the rich pay their fair share?? Are you all on the take or something?? Do you enjoy having your lips firmly planted on the butts of big oil and big business??

Your solution isn't the real solution and never will be.. As long as you deny the reason we got into this mess in the first place.. Tax cuts and increase spending.. Meaning the wars.. So we need to cut spending on defense and raise taxes.. Anyone with gradeschool math could tell you that..

I write off as ignorant anyone who claims that a group that makes 22% of the income and does not own all of the property yet pays 40% of the federal income tax and almost all the death tax is not paying its fair share. That just defies any sort of intellectual honesty

if fairness is based on a group's share of the income the top one ,two and five percent pay far more than their fair share

if fairness is based on how much government services the top one two or five percent use, that group pays far more than their fair share

if fairness is based on the value of services received from the government, that group pays far more than the value it gets

those who pay no income tax pay far less than their fair share based on any of those three objective standards

and since only about 2% of the voters face a death tax, 98% of the voters don't pay their fair share and those 2% pay far far more than their fair share

If you want to whine that since the rich have more money and less votes it makes political sense to soak them, that at least is intellectually honest

to claim that the rich don't pay their fair share relegates you not being taken seriously with me
 
Back
Top Bottom