• 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!

White House Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires

Status
Not open for further replies.
haymarket said:
I do not know how you can speak for progressives when you are not one of them. I am and I certainly want the debt to be dealt with and paid down. I think its disgusting that my grandchildren will be paying for unfunded and unneeded foreign wars, tax cuts for the wealthy, and unfunded mandates incurred when they had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

tax cuts went to everyone who pays taxes. only increasing taxes on the rich means the dems are pandering to class warfare and are afraid of pissing off large numbers of voters. and given the additional spending Obama wants, such hikes will do nothing to solve the deficit and COULD cost job creation
 
haymarket said:
Feeding hungry children is indeed a positive result. Treating the sick is a positive result. Providing for shelter so people do not freeze during the winter is indeed a positive result.
Click to expand...


Feeding hungry children is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility and has been pointed out when you raise federal taxes you affect state tax revenues.

Treating the sick is a state responsibility not a Federal responsibility for what does a Federal Bureaucrat know about a problem in Lansing, Michigan?

Providing shelter is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility for when you send money to the Federal Govt. you pay a middleman to do what you should be doing at the state level.

Keep thinking only with your heart instead of the brain God gave you.
 
haymarket said:
Feeding hungry children is indeed a positive result. Treating the sick is a positive result. Providing for shelter so people do not freeze during the winter is indeed a positive result.
Click to expand...

I really don't buy that is what motivates people like Kerry and Obama. as Goshin has pointed out ad nauseum, the amount of money taking versus what actually goes to help people who actually needs it is pathetic and small
 
Conservative said:
Feeding hungry children is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility and has been pointed out when you raise federal taxes you affect state tax revenues.

Treating the sick is a state responsibility not a Federal responsibility for what does a Federal Bureaucrat know about a problem in Lansing, Michigan?

Providing shelter is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility for when you send money to the Federal Govt. you pay a middleman to do what you should be doing at the state level.

Keep thinking only with your heart instead of the brain God gave you.
Click to expand...

the left understands that if such functions were properly left to the states the easy migration from one state to another would prevent any state from being too "generous" because net tax payers would leave that state while it filled with those wanting handouts and that state would go belly up. That is why the left wants federal jurisdiction in welfare-so people like me and other high net taxpayers cannot escape easily.
 
TurtleDude said:
You must still have some of the weed you brought back if you believe that nonsense. 64 million whats?

people who aren't paying any income taxes but demand more and more money from others?
Click to expand...

I never had a need for weed or any other drug, that's 64 million US citizens but that does not matter to you because some where in your mind you are better then 90% of the global population, unfortunately for you US citizens get to vote and they will not be voting for libertarians or conservatives
 
TurtleDude said:
the left understands that if such functions were properly left to the states the easy migration from one state to another would prevent any state from being too "generous" because net tax payers would leave that state while it filled with those wanting handouts and that state would go belly up. That is why the left wants federal jurisdiction in welfare-so people like me and other high net taxpayers cannot escape easily.
Click to expand...

Like far too many liberals they focus on govt. spending instead of taxpayer spending which is where the govt. gets all its money. That way it is easier to shirk state responsibility and blame others for their own failures. Michigan is a disaster and it seems that haymarket is happier blaming someone else and looking for national taxpayer handouts
 
EarlzP said:
I never had a need for weed or any other drug, that's 64 million US citizens but that does not matter to you because some where in your mind you are better then 90% of the global population, unfortunately for you US citizens get to vote and they will not be voting for libertarians or conservatives
Click to expand...

where did you get 64 million from?
 
EarlzP said:
I never had a need for weed or any other drug, that's 64 million US citizens but that does not matter to you because some where in your mind you are better then 90% of the global population, unfortunately for you US citizens get to vote and they will not be voting for libertarians or conservatives
Click to expand...

Don't let the facts ever get in the way of your personal opinions and biased beliefs

In 2010, Conservatives Still Outnumber Moderates, Liberals
 
Conservative said:
Feeding hungry children is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility and has been pointed out when you raise federal taxes you affect state tax revenues.

Treating the sick is a state responsibility not a Federal responsibility for what does a Federal Bureaucrat know about a problem in Lansing, Michigan?

Providing shelter is a state responsibility not a Federal Responsibility for when you send money to the Federal Govt. you pay a middleman to do what you should be doing at the state level.

Keep thinking only with your heart instead of the brain God gave you.
Click to expand...

Moving the goal posts again it would seem. Five minutes ago it was whining about positive results. Now its shifting gears and a new monster rears its ugly head -.
 
TurtleDude said:
tax cuts went to everyone who pays taxes. only increasing taxes on the rich means the dems are pandering to class warfare and are afraid of pissing off large numbers of voters. and given the additional spending Obama wants, such hikes will do nothing to solve the deficit and COULD cost job creation
Click to expand...

Indeed they did with the largest cuts going to the richest. And the Dems cannot pander on this issue since it was a Republican President and 92% of the YES votes to pass the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts came from Republicans.... as has been well established and documented.
 
haymarket said:
Indeed they did with the largest cuts going to the richest. And the Dems cannot pander on this issue since it was a Republican President and 92% of the YES votes to pass the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts came from Republicans.... as has been well established and documented.
Click to expand...

well when the richest tax payers pay more taxes than most of the rest of america what do you expect.

What also is documented is that the dems want the rich to pay even more and they don't want the majority of america to have to sacrifice any more to reign in the deficit. Pandering for votes for sure
 
TurtleDude said:
well when the richest tax payers pay more taxes than most of the rest of america what do you expect.

What also is documented is that the dems want the rich to pay even more and they don't want the majority of america to have to sacrifice any more to reign in the deficit. Pandering for votes for sure
Click to expand...

I do not expect the breaks to go to those who need it the least. That is what I expect.

I am a Democrat and work in government. I am on record as saying that ALL Americans should pay an increase in federal income tax. I work every day with Dems who share my sentiments. Who exactly does than pander to?
 
haymarket said:
I do not expect the breaks to go to those who need it the least. That is what I expect.

I am a Democrat and work in government. I am on record as saying that ALL Americans should pay an increase in federal income tax. I work every day with Dems who share my sentiments. Who exactly does than pander to?
Click to expand...

if you give it to people who "need it the most" what you have done is engaged in income redistribution yet again.

Pandering for votes is obvious Your PARTY only wants to make the rich pay more and some of the rich NEED the money they have now. Like it or not there are many people making 300-600K a year or so who are actually pretty over extended. people making 50-80K a year often project their own expenses on the rich and figure all those rich people can cough up another 40-60K a year in taxes which is complete BS.
 
Need is as idiotic a phrase as "fair" btw.
 
TurtleDude said:
if you give it to people who "need it the most" what you have done is engaged in income redistribution yet again.

Pandering for votes is obvious Your PARTY only wants to make the rich pay more and some of the rich NEED the money they have now. Like it or not there are many people making 300-600K a year or so who are actually pretty over extended. people making 50-80K a year often project their own expenses on the rich and figure all those rich people can cough up another 40-60K a year in taxes which is complete BS.
Click to expand...

Better call it income re-redistribution ... to account for the trillion dollars we gave to Wall Street and the outsized tax breaks the wealthy received under Bush.

The fact remains that the rich are paying more in taxes because they have more in relation to everyone else than they've had in generations. "Why is my air conditioning bill so f*cking high?!" "Uh, maybe because you're living in a 30,000 square foot house?"
 
haymarket said:
Indeed they did with the largest cuts going to the richest. And the Dems cannot pander on this issue since it was a Republican President and 92% of the YES votes to pass the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts came from Republicans.... as has been well established and documented.
Click to expand...

Fairly weak response. We expect better from you. It seems you failed to address the issue presented which is that the "Bush Tax Cuts" impacted many more than the "rich". So why is it that a President that calls for shared sacrifice wants to get rid of this benefit for top earners. Perhaps his request would be better received if he and perhaps you were a bit more honest and called for the tax cuts to be eliminated in their entirety. Not doing so leaves you open to turtle's views.
 
EarlzP said:
I never had a need for weed or any other drug, that's 64 million US citizens but that does not matter to you because some where in your mind you are better then 90% of the global population, unfortunately for you US citizens get to vote and they will not be voting for libertarians or conservatives
Click to expand...

Over the time I have been here Earl, I have learned the value that Turtledude brings to the election campaign. You've seen his posts...........could there be a better example for the moderates and independent working class not to vote for the positions expressed in his posts???

Just relish each time he says the working class are pathetic leeches.
 
washunut said:
Fairly weak response. We expect better from you. It seems you failed to address the issue presented which is that the "Bush Tax Cuts" impacted many more than the "rich". So why is it that a President that calls for shared sacrifice wants to get rid of this benefit for top earners. Perhaps his request would be better received if he and perhaps you were a bit more honest and called for the tax cuts to be eliminated in their entirety. Not doing so leaves you open to turtle's views.
Click to expand...

That's easy, because those that get most of their income from investments received a bigger tax cut of their total income than did the middle class who work for a living.
 
"Like Warren Buffett, hip hop mogul Russell Simmons, whose net worth is estimated at $340 million, is calling on President Obama to raise his taxes. “For far too long in this country we have allowed the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer,” Simmons wrote, calling on policymakers to preserve social safety net programs for the most needy. Simmons, who has also joined with the Occupy Wall Street protests, appeared on MSNBC today to discuss his cause. “All my employees — every single one — paid more taxes than I did,” he said, noting that he donated $10 million to charity and thus received big tax breaks. “We need to make the rich pay their fair share.”

Simmons also shot down conservative claims that raising taxes on the wealthy would hurt job creation, saying he makes all his hiring decisions based on pre-tax, not post-tax income."

 
TurtleDude said:
if you give it to people who "need it the most" what you have done is engaged in income redistribution yet again.

Pandering for votes is obvious Your PARTY only wants to make the rich pay more and some of the rich NEED the money they have now. Like it or not there are many people making 300-600K a year or so who are actually pretty over extended. people making 50-80K a year often project their own expenses on the rich and figure all those rich people can cough up another 40-60K a year in taxes which is complete BS.
Click to expand...

So what? Some income has been collected in a legal manner from the very wealthy and has been utilized to run the peoples government and spend it on programs approved and endorsed by the peoples government.

If the very wealthy do indeed - as you put it - NEED the money than they have now - despite it being more than 95 to 98% of the American people have - they need some good lessons in money management and budgeting. After all, that is how you folks on the right keep turning the tables on the US government. You righties keep preaching that the government has plenty of money, they do NOT need more, they simply need to manage it better and spend it more wisely. So this same principle should apply to the very wealthy and part of their built in spending should be taxation which benefits this nation and its people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom