• 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!

United States loses its AAA Credit rating from S & P

Status
Not open for further replies.
Conservative said:
Right, no problem, a credit downgrade is never a problem in the liberal world, just print more money
Click to expand...

Correction, it's only a problem when they can blame Republicans for it ...... when they can't ... then it becomes a non issue ... cases in point .. the Patriot Act ... .and shutting down gitmo ... under Bush these things were terrible .. . and on the list of liberal talking points ... 30 months into Obama term .... Gitmo is no longer and issue .... the "expanded" Patriot Act ... no longer an issue ..
 
pbrauer said:
American Millionaires: 1,400 Paid No U.S. Income Taxes In 2009
Click to expand...

yes, .6% of the millionaires and billionaires got off as scot free as obama's JOBS CZAR

another interesting take on that pile of irs data released last week---if you tax america's millionaires and billionaires 100%, you won't make a dent

IRS: 235,413 million-dollar earners - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

social security, medicare, medicaid, pensions and other federal entitlements are sinking an additional 5.3 trillion dollars per year

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com
 
Conservative said:
Ok, 1400 millionaires paid No Income Taxes. Since there are 65 million that didn't pay any FIT those 1400 would take that down to 64,998,600 others. Wonder if those 1400 not paying income taxes would be more than the 64,998,600 who didn't pay any either?
Click to expand...

It's pretty simple, really. In order to pay for government you have to get a lot of the money from the few people who have all the money.

"Tax rates on the richest Americans have plunged in recent years, and millionaires today pay tax rates that are 25 percent lower than they were in 1995. Meanwhile, income inequality is the worst its been since the 1920s, with the top 1 percent of Americans taking home 25 percent of the country’s total income. Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined, and the richest 10 percent of Americans control two-thirds of the country’s net worth."

Let's repeat that again for dramatic effect: "Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined."
 
Last edited:
The Barbarian said:
Correction, it's only a problem when they can blame Republicans for it ...... when they can't ... then it becomes a non issue ... cases in point .. the Patriot Act ... .and shutting down gitmo ... under Bush these things were terrible .. . and on the list of liberal talking points ... 30 months into Obama term .... Gitmo is no longer and issue .... the "expanded" Patriot Act ... no longer an issue ..
Click to expand...
Who says they're no longer an issue? Clearly Obama isn't as liberal as much as liberals thought he was. That doesn't mean they won't vote for, but there is certainly disappointment.
 
AdamT said:
In order to pay for government you have to get a lot of the money from the few people who have all the money.
Click to expand...

"They're sitting on the money, they're using it for their own -- they're putting it someplace else with no interest in helping you with your life, with that money. We've allowed them to take that. That's not theirs, that's a national resource, that's ours. We all have this -- we all benefit from this or we all suffer as a result of not having it," Michael Moore told Laura Flanders of GRITtv.
Click to expand...

RealClearPolitics - Video - Moore On Wealthy People's Money: "That's Not Theirs, That's A National Resource, It's Ours"

seeya at the polls, progressives
 
AdamT said:
It's pretty simple, really. In order to pay for government you have to get a lot of the money from the few people who have all the money.

"Tax rates on the richest Americans have plunged in recent years, and millionaires today pay tax rates that are 25 percent lower than they were in 1995. Meanwhile, income inequality is the worst its been since the 1920s, with the top 1 percent of Americans taking home 25 percent of the country’s total income. Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined, and the richest 10 percent of Americans control two-thirds of the country’s net worth."

Let's repeat that again for dramatic effect: "Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined."
Click to expand...

Do you think tax rates really matter more than the actual amounts collected? I would assume that you are going to school and the question is why are you doing that if not to better yourself and earn more money so that you can decide where to spend it and what charites to support. Why do you need the govt. to do it for you? I asked you before if you believe we need a 3.7 trillion dollar govt and you never answered. why is that?

I further pointed out that over 65 million income earners aren't paying any FIT so tell me what their fair share is? You seem to hate rich people, I don't as that is what I always tried to become thus allowing me to need less of that so called govt. help and to spend my money on the charities that I support without deducting federal administrative costs?
 
The Prof said:
yes, .6% of the millionaires and billionaires got off as scot free as obama's JOBS CZAR

another interesting take on that pile of irs data released last week---if you tax america's millionaires and billionaires 100%, you won't make a dent[/url]
Click to expand...
Who is talking about taxing anyone 100%? That's ridiculous.
 
pbrauer said:
Who is talking about taxing anyone 100%? That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

How much revenue do you think will be generated by raising the taxes on those rich people then? If you cannot get 100% is it really worth it? Any downside?
 
pbrauer said:
American Millionaires: 1,400 Paid No U.S. Income Taxes In 2009
Click to expand...

Okay … so if you taxed those 60 million that paid nothing .. 250 dollars for the year (5 dollars a week) thats a 15 billion dollar income

To get that same income from the 1400 that paid no FIT you would have to tax them over 10 million each …. have to wonder how many of those 1400 didn't make 10 million in wages

Not saying they should be allowed to get away with paying no taxes either … just showing you by the pure numbers where.... there is no fairness in our tax system.
 
The Barbarian said:
Okay … so if you taxed those 60 million that paid nothing .. 250 dollars for the year (5 dollars a week) thats a 15 billion dollar income

To get that same income from the 1400 that paid no FIT you would have to tax them over 10 million each …. have to wonder how many of those 1400 didn't make 10 million in wages

Not saying they should be allowed to get away with paying no taxes either … just showing you by the pure numbers where.... there is no fairness in our tax system.
Click to expand...

Logic and common sense aren't strong suits for liberals who don't think about what they are proposing
 
candidate obama would raise taxes even if they DON'T yield revenue

charlie gibson (the guy who got the gotcha girl, palin): "in each instance when the rate was dropped the revenue from the tax increased, the govt took in more money, and in the 1980's when the tax was increased to 28% the revenues went down"

obama: "well, charlie, what i've said is i would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness, we saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made 29 billion dollars last year, 29 billion dollars for 50 individuals, and part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries, that's not fair"

charlie: "but history shows when you drop the capital gains tax the revenues go up"

obama: "that might happen or it might not"

FLASHBACK: Obama Says Raising Taxes Not About Revenue But About Fairness - Katie Pavlich

hey, raise the rates---revenues MIGHT go up

LOL!

know who you're dealing with
 
pbrauer said:
Who is talking about taxing anyone 100%? That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

well, thank goodness for that

LOL!

but even IF you did tax the millioinaires and billionaires 100%, it wouldn't make a dent

social security, medicare, medicaid, pensions and other entitlements are sinking an additional 5.3 trillion dollars per year

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com

if something isn't done NOW to fundamentally reform our precious programs they will expire

leadership, anyone?
 
Conservative said:
Do you think tax rates really matter more than the actual amounts collected? I would assume that you are going to school and the question is why are you doing that if not to better yourself and earn more money so that you can decide where to spend it and what charites to support. Why do you need the govt. to do it for you? I asked you before if you believe we need a 3.7 trillion dollar govt and you never answered. why is that?

I further pointed out that over 65 million income earners aren't paying any FIT so tell me what their fair share is? You seem to hate rich people, I don't as that is what I always tried to become thus allowing me to need less of that so called govt. help and to spend my money on the charities that I support without deducting federal administrative costs?
Click to expand...

I don't know why you assume I'm going to school. That's odd.

We need the government to supply a safety net for the simple reason that there wouldn't be one otherwise. Medicare/aid and SS effectively halved the poverty rate that was based on charity and smaller government programs.

I did in fact answer your question re: whether we need a $3.7 trillion government. What I said, and will say again, is that a dollar figure is meaningless without consideration of what it buys. I think that military spending can be cut substantially. I think that Medicare and SS can be reformed to reduce costs without having a big impact on services. And whatever the result is, that's how much we need to spend, after increasing the budget for infrastructure. If tax receipts can't pay for it, then taxes must go up.

The famous 47% (actually 45%) who don't pay FIT is inflated due to the recession, but in any case they should pay more. I think that all of the Bush tax cuts should sunset in a year or two. There should also be several higher tax brackets above the current top bracket.

I don't hate rich people. By many people's standards I am a rich person. Rich people can afford to pay more taxes without affecting their lifestyles. The poor and working class cannot. Simple as that.
 
Conservative said:
Any downside?
Click to expand...

well, governor cuomo of new york---for example---states unequivocally that "the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
It's pretty simple, really. In order to pay for government you have to get a lot of the money from the few people who have all the money.

"Tax rates on the richest Americans have plunged in recent years, and millionaires today pay tax rates that are 25 percent lower than they were in 1995. Meanwhile, income inequality is the worst its been since the 1920s, with the top 1 percent of Americans taking home 25 percent of the country’s total income. Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined, and the richest 10 percent of Americans control two-thirds of the country’s net worth."

Let's repeat that again for dramatic effect: "Just the richest 400 Americans hold more wealth than the bottom 50 percent of Americans combined."
Click to expand...

yes repeat it again .... but be sure to add ... there is a vast difference between wealth .... and income .. as highlighted in your own post the top 1% take home 25% of the income ... while paying nearly 40% of all taxes ....

lets repeat that again ... the top 1% take hom 25% of the total income while paying nearly 40% of all FIT


So if we are looking for income equality, shouldn't that top 1% that takes home 25% of this nations income ... have to pay 25% of all FIT??
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
I don't know why you assume I'm going to school. That's odd.

We need the government to supply a safety net for the simple reason that there wouldn't be one otherwise. Medicare/aid and SS effectively halved the poverty rate that was based on charity and smaller government programs.

I did in fact answer your question re: whether we need a $3.7 trillion government. What I said, and will say again, is that a dollar figure is meaningless without consideration of what it buys. I think that military spending can be cut substantially. I think that Medicare and SS can be reformed to reduce costs without having a big impact on services. And whatever the result is, that's how much we need to spend, after increasing the budget for infrastructure. If tax receipts can't pay for it, then taxes must go up.

The famous 47% (actually 45%) who don't pay FIT is inflated due to the recession, but in any case they should pay more. I think that all of the Bush tax cuts should sunset in a year or two. There should also be several higher tax brackets above the current top bracket.

I don't hate rich people. By many people's standards I am a rich person. Rich people can afford to pay more taxes without affecting their lifestyles. The poor and working class cannot. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

What it buys? How about a 14.5 trillion dollar debt? You talk about a safety net without ever identifying who that safety net is for? Liberals love to include as many as possible including the clueless and those that abuse the system. I know of no means teasting for aid from the taxpayer so can you believe provide me who that safety net is for and how much that will entail? You claim the military can be cut, ok, how much? It is 700 billion dollars out of that budget now so a small percentage. Isn't that the role our Founders created for the govt?

That 47% is what it was in 2009 and really doesn't matter, cut it to 30% or whatever you want and compare that to the 1% of the top income earners and ask yourself if that percentage paying nothing is their fair share?

Rich people pay more in taxes and rich people contribute more to charities without sending it to the govt. first. That is something liberals ignore. Any idea what the administrative costs are for money going to the govt. so they can redirect it to where they deem necessary?

Where is the Obama leadership on any of these issues. His economic policies have been a disaster and the results are quite telling, all in 2011

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 24+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch!
 
The Prof said:
well, governor cuomo of new york---for example---states unequivocally that "the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"
Click to expand...

Shhh, don't tell that to the liberals who will soon find out that taxpayers are fleeing the state and there won't be enough left to fund their liberal spending appetite
 
AdamT said:
No one is suggesting that we raise taxes to "crushing levels". That is a straw man argument.
Click to expand...

OMG, that is SO true.
 
Phys251 said:
OMG, that is SO true.
Click to expand...

Then address the issue since no other liberal will. How much revenue do you expect to raise on increased taxes for the rich? Then compare that to the amount available from the 65 million income earners who aren't paying anything at all in FIT?
 
And the large government we have is all too often responsive to the special interests, over the people of the State of New York. The proof is in the pudding. And New Yorkers are voting with their feet. Two million New Yorkers have left the State over the past decade. What does this say? It says we need radical reform, it says we need a new approach, we need a new perspective and we need it now. We must use this moment to transform our government.
Click to expand...

GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

"what made new york the empire state was a not a large government complex, it was a vibrant private sector that was creating great jobs"

"at the heart of this state is business"

"we have to relearn the lesson our founders knew and we have to put up a sign that says new york is open for business, we get it, and this is going to be a business friendly state"

"we have to hold the line on taxes for now and reduce taxes in the future, new york has no future as the tax capital of the nation, our young people will not stay, our business will not come"

"put it simply, the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"

"we have to start with an emergency financial plan to stabilize our finances, we need to hold the line and we need to institute a wage freeze in the state of new york, we need to hold the line on taxes, we need a state spending cap and we need to close this $10 billion gap without any borrowing"

leadership, anyone?
 
AdamT said:
No one is suggesting that we raise taxes to "crushing levels".
Click to expand...

the extremely popular and so far very successful democrat governor of new york says the people of his state can't afford to pay ANY more taxes...

period

GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

point being---just how far, realistically, can some tax the greedhead movement go?

when probably the most successful democrat leader in the nation is standing in the way?

reality trumps fantasies, francis
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom