• 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.
Jimmy Carter made George Bush look bad. Carter created 10 million jobs in 4 years compared to Bush creating 4 million jobs in 8 years.
Click to expand...

You left out Bush destroying jobs because his policies didn't take effect until Obama was elected.
 
Conservative said:
Sorry, no it isn't, no President in modern history has ever had 25 plus million unemployed and under employed. Keep spinning.
Click to expand...

You understand that population has an exponential effect over time, right? So the whole 25 plus million doesn't actually mean anything the percentage is what is important. Why if your concerned about the unemployed in this country do the conservatives consistently staunchly oppose policies which would help lift these people out of their trying circumstances. Instead you oppose jobs programs with the exception of the military industrial complex which produces weapons which we sell to countries who buy them with subsidies we provide them so they can use them later on their citizens and us. You support tax cuts with the wealthy by making a backwards argument where somehow the amount of money the rich can hoard in bonds and derivatives somehow affects the market demand for products and jobs. While meanwhile proposing that those who possess less than 10 percent of the nation's wealth pay more taxes. Your propagandists at fox cite inaccurate statistics that 46 % of Americans don't pay income taxes while the actual number is more like 18 % and those are the retired, unemployed, extremely underemployed, and children. I suppose that's just another conservative not being expected to be taken seriously like your whip Jon Kyl who lied on the congressional floor and thought nothing of it. I believe it was you who mentioned they gave money to the church. What would Jesus do?
 
Jryan said:
You left out Bush destroying jobs because his policies didn't take effect until Obama was elected.
Click to expand...
8 million jobs were lost during the Bush Great Recession. 4 million of those occurred during the first half of 2009 which Conservatives thrive over blaming Obama for.

Go figure :shrug:
 
alexxouellette said:
You understand that population has an exponential effect over time, right? So the whole 25 plus million doesn't actually mean anything the percentage is what is important.
Click to expand...
You have to understand, Conservative doesn't like percentages. Why ... ? ... because once you factor in population growth and labor force growth, the unemployment rate during Obama's first 32 months in office hasn't increased as much as it did during any Republican president going back at least as far as Herbert Hoover ...



Nixon +77%
Bush +45%
Eisenhower +41%
Ford* +36%
GHW Bush +28%
Reagan +23%
Obama +17%
Kennedy -17%
Carter -21%
Clinton -23%
Johnson -33%

* = Ford was in office 29 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Are you poor? Who makes up that list of poor? You claim to be an expert on what it costs to live these days and what people spend their money on. What makes you an expert, textbooks? I am still waiting for someone to explain why Reagan is so popular today if he policies were such a failure. The top marginal rate of Reagan was 28%, not 50%. You want to pay 91% of your income to the govt? Do it and stop forcing others to do what you want to do. You actually believe people paid 91% of their income in taxes? Think about it and stop being spoon fed the liberal lies.
Click to expand...

I am pretty poor actually , I'm a college student working while going to school so I can pay for school. Never claimed to be an expert once just cited some statistics which is something physical, real, and helpful to understanding what we're discussing. Reagan's popular among your crowd, not mine, and he's popular because he's been lauded by certain individuals in order to reinforce certain policy decisions because as you so aptly put Reagan's tax rate was 28%, what i was mentioning was that during his first term in office the tax rate was 50%, he lowered it during his term in office and since then wealth disparity in this has grown substantially. I don't want to tax anyone at 91%, once again I never said that, but I don't think that given historical rates 39 percent is too much to ask. What exactly was the liberal lie.
 
Conservative said:
Are you poor? Who makes up that list of poor? You claim to be an expert on what it costs to live these days and what people spend their money on. What makes you an expert, textbooks? I am still waiting for someone to explain why Reagan is so popular today if he policies were such a failure. The top marginal rate of Reagan was 28%, not 50%. You want to pay 91% of your income to the govt? Do it and stop forcing others to do what you want to do. You actually believe people paid 91% of their income in taxes? Think about it and stop being spoon fed the liberal lies.
Click to expand...

Also, what do you have against books?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
No matter how you try to spin it -- 400,000 jobs added in September.


Jimmy Carter made George Bush look bad. Carter created 10 million jobs in 4 years compared to Bush creating 4 million jobs in 8 years.[/QUOTE


Tell that to the 25+ million unemployed and under employed. You certainly have that liberal compassion.
Click to expand...
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I have no complaints with the BLS, you do. You're the one claiming 400,000 jobs were added last month despite their website showing 400,000 jobs were added.

Now about that book you were talking about -- what is the title so I can faqct check your bogus claim?
Click to expand...
Net was a little over 100k but you never count those dropping out of the market, do you? That is disengenuous which you are all the time, the net wasn't 400k but the net is 9.1% unemployment and 16.5% U-6. Glad you are happy with those numbers.
 
Jryan said:
You left out Bush destroying jobs because his policies didn't take effect until Obama was elected.
Click to expand...

It is almost 3 years later and there are still more unemployed than when he took office. How long are you going to blame Bush. Do they teach civics in school? What does Congress do and who controlled Congress in 2008. Democrats or Republicans? Be a good little liberal now and let them destroy your credibility.
 
alexxouellette said:
You understand that population has an exponential effect over time, right? So the whole 25 plus million doesn't actually mean anything the percentage is what is important. Why if your concerned about the unemployed in this country do the conservatives consistently staunchly oppose policies which would help lift these people out of their trying circumstances. Instead you oppose jobs programs with the exception of the military industrial complex which produces weapons which we sell to countries who buy them with subsidies we provide them so they can use them later on their citizens and us. You support tax cuts with the wealthy by making a backwards argument where somehow the amount of money the rich can hoard in bonds and derivatives somehow affects the market demand for products and jobs. While meanwhile proposing that those who possess less than 10 percent of the nation's wealth pay more taxes. Your propagandists at fox cite inaccurate statistics that 46 % of Americans don't pay income taxes while the actual number is more like 18 % and those are the retired, unemployed, extremely underemployed, and children. I suppose that's just another conservative not being expected to be taken seriously like your whip Jon Kyl who lied on the congressional floor and thought nothing of it. I believe it was you who mentioned they gave money to the church. What would Jesus do?
Click to expand...

What jobs program? the first stimulus program? How did that work out? Now the second that hasn't even been introduced into the Congress? Why do you buy what Obama tells you? Are you a student too?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
You have to understand, Conservative doesn't like percentages. Why ... ? ... because once you factor in population growth and labor force growth, the unemployment rate during Obama's first 32 months in office hasn't increased as much as it did during any Republican president going back at least as far as Herbert Hoover ...



Nixon +77%
Bush +45%
Eisenhower +41%
Ford* +36%
GHW Bush +28%
Reagan +23%
Obama +17%
Kennedy -17%
Carter -21%
Clinton -23%
Johnson -33%

* = Ford was in office 29 months

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data​
Click to expand...

Tell me how percentage change works in your world, taking the debt for example from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion is a greater percentage than taking the debt from 10.6 trillion to 14.6 trillion which by your standards says Obama did a better job than Reagan because the percentage was lower. Anyone here believe increasing the debt 4 trillion dollars is better than increasing the debt 1.7 trillion? That shows your percentage change argument is bogus but that allow you to ignore real numbers thus real people and real dollars.

Let me know when Bush had 25 million unemployed and under employed?
 
alexxouellette said:
Also, what do you have against books?
Click to expand...

They kill a lot trees and fill your head with a lot of mush. I too got a college education and combined with 35 years of street smarts gave me a well rounded education. Liberalism appeals to those who cannot think with their brain but instead use only their hearts.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
What jobs program? the first stimulus program? How did that work out? Now the second that hasn't even been introduced into the Congress? Why do you buy what Obama tells you? Are you a student too?
Click to expand...

You really have no clue what I'm talking about. First of all not crazy about some of the things Obama has done, I'm liberal not a democrat there's a difference. Second when I refer to jobs programs I'm referring to the sort of thing FDR did. I'm proposing that perhaps instead of perpetually reinforcing the military industrial complex which is a giant jobs program that instead we start programs to rebuild the infrastructure of our country. By doing this we provide jobs while at the same time we do something good for our country. It seems a lot more efficient to me than the current way of doing things. Third I'm noticing a disturbing trend where you don't build an actual argument but instead continue to comment on the person who is writing the opposing side of the argument. My opening sentence as I tried to explain to you before yet I can see from other posts you have made you still don't understand is that since population grows( and it grows exponentially, since every child born than has children of their own) actual numbers like 25 million mean nothing in comparison to percentages which more readily describe the reality of the situation. However point taken unemployment is high, Obama has yet to remedy the situation, however to blame him for all of the unemployment is to blame him for the recession which occurred before he even took presidential office.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
They kill a lot trees and fill your head with a lot of mush. I too got a college education and combined with 35 years of street smarts gave me a well rounded education. Liberalism appeals to those who cannot think with their brain but instead use only their hearts.
Click to expand...

Your grammar betrays you. It serves me better to let you continue to speak on the subject than to even submit a rebuttal.
 
Conservative said:
They kill a lot trees and fill your head with a lot of mush. I too got a college education and combined with 35 years of street smarts .
Click to expand...

Working in corporate America now equates to street smarts?

Oh man you are to funny:lamo
 
iliveonramen;1059854323]It's like week 1. Why don't you wait a bit and see what the goals end up being. The Tea Party is almost in year 4. It takes time before movements either dissapate (which is possible) or form a true movement. I'm saying reserve judgement. You don't have to agree with them off the bat or be a supporter but why not wait to see what their goals are before assuming they are long haired hippies wanting a hand out.
Click to expand...

We know what the T.E.A. Party wants, why not the Wall Street group? None of them seem to have a clue nor do they have an alternative, do you? What exactly would you like to see happen?

I think for the most part it's increased our deficits. I think for a large part it's led to a concentration of wealth to the few. Why exactly are you personalizing this, I actually work in a very good job and do very well but my problems with trickle down are the results of trickle down economics.
Click to expand...

How does a policy that increased Tax revenue and generated 17 million new taxpayers increase the debt? spending causes debt not Reaganomics. What exactly is your problem with trickle down economics? Think trickle up is better or redistribution of wealth?

Innovation doesn't stop with higher tax rates. This idea that Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerman only exist because of lower marginal tax rates and low capital gains tax is false. It's a good sales pitch but it isn't proven with reality. You would have to show an absence of innovation during times of high marginal tax rates for the wealthy which is not the case. I also find it interesting that you have pointed out very progressive innovators who I doubt would quit working if their tax rate went up 5% or so.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point, there isn't only Federal Taxes but there are state and local taxes as well so what is the fair share that the rich should pay? Please give me an amount then tell me how much additional revenue that will generate for the govt? Why is that even an issue?

Reagan was also a very big deficit spending (Keynesian), Volcker started decreasing interests rates after finally beating inflation in 83', and oil prices dropped globally. To point to tax breaks as the reason is pretty disenginous because taxes are lower now than they were under Reagan. Clinton increased tax rates right before the boom in the 90's. You can't really claim taxes have such an effect on innovation and growth without explaining away the contradictions and other possible causes...which no one can.
Click to expand...

Reagan spent money on the military and with that spending left Clinton a "peace dividend" Why do you have a problem keeping more of your money? Do you have a problem with choosing how to spend it and need the govt. to help you? I assume that you know where your money goes when you spend it. Do you know where your money goes when it goes to the govt?


And FDR is a very popular President still 60 years after he was President. His economic policies were the polar opposite of Reagans in a lot of ways. Just because he's a popular President does not mean everything he did was perfect.
Click to expand...

We are paying for FDR's New Deal today. His SS program was designed never to be paid out and now is a ponzi scheme.


I am. You're the one with an idealized picture that doesn't meet reality. I've posted why i think the way I do.
Click to expand...

I back my statements up with verifiable data.


Like I mentioned, it doesn't mean all his policies were perfect. He was the great communicator not the great economists. Liberals are anti-Reagan because he's the antithesis in economic policies to Liberalism. It's like asking why Libertarians are so anti-Roosevelt.
Click to expand...

No President is perfect but I will support any policy that allows the American people, even you, to keep more of what you earn and thus spend your money on the programs you deem worthy.
 
EarlzP;1059854252]
I think sitting out of work for six months is too long,lets make a part of drawing goverment help work for everyone. Neut Gingrich said that people out of work should be going to school, I agree to an extent. Lets have placement programs focused to place people in a position to learn as they wait for openings in their choosen job fields. Going to college or even trade schools gives people an opportunity to learn one part of work, hands on experience provides the final element needed to complete any education. With many seniors now looking to retire lets start to place qualified prospective people in a hands on enviroment where they can gain from the experience and knowledge of those already employed.
Click to expand...

It is now two years, not 6 months and where did that 842 billion dollar first stimulu program go? Placement programs where? Where is the incentive for business to hire people with this Administration demonizing profit and wealth creation and you supporting them? Still waiting for you to tell me what the alternative is to Capitalism?
Click to expand...

EarlzP:You can either be part of the solution or part of the problem, which do you want to be? I did not suggest that businesses hire people, I suggested that people drawing unemployment or any type of government assistance be placed in a related work field, are you following me? Lets say that I am in out of work person drawing unemployment I have completed my degree and I am now ready to go to work, instead of my sitting around as a condition of my unemployment check I am placed with a company that fits my degree or my trade profile, the company I am placed with pays NOTHING and I get the job experience that will help me and any company I find employment with in the future, are you with me now? The baby boomer generation will soon be retiring this assures employers that they have a pool of educated or skilled people that are ready to go and makes it so that sitting home is no longer an option.

EarlzP
College loan payments and interest should be put on hold until the graduate is working, the same benefit should be extended to trades people, those without college or trade skills should be given the help they need to acquire an education.
Click to expand...

Where do college loans come from and can't you do better locally? Why is this the role of the Federal Govt?
Click to expand...

EarlzP:Why should any person be denied the opportunity to further their education because they can't obtain a student loan, why should students have to decide between taking a low paying job or getting an education. We have an employment problem in this country we need every potiential Bill Gates or Steve Jobs to have an opportunity to pursue an education in a field that they are interested in. The government "We the People" can make low interest or no interest long term loans ensuring that every young person has a choice, a choice that will not saddle them with a debt that will have a hard time paying off. We can't afford to lose one person who has the desire and the will to further their education

EarlzP: We need to offer a hand up not a hand out, we need to offer hope in this period of high unemployment not criticism to people who have prepared for a job that is non existant No problem offering an hand up but not a hand out, but that isn't what is happening today.
Click to expand...

The chronic unemployed aren't going back to work and will collect unemployment as long as they can. There are jobs all over the place today but not THE job and sometimes you start low and work your way up. You seem to be unable to grasp that concept
Click to expand...

All people are not lazy bums who do not want to get out and get started. Can you stop with your sterotyping long enough to address the unemployment situation we are faced with. Lets say you are right and that people are not really interested in going to work, what would you suggest to get them motivated to get out and get going, my suggestion is to make drawing their check dependant on their getting up and get going doing some thing to mobilize them and at the same time give them the job exposure that will make them more valuable to employers.
 
Conservative said:
Net was a little over 100k but you never count those dropping out of the market, do you? That is disengenuous which you are all the time, the net wasn't 400k but the net is 9.1% unemployment and 16.5% U-6. Glad you are happy with those numbers.
Click to expand...
400,000 ...

BLS says so ...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data



Now where's that book title, Con? Why are you so afraid to tell me? I am getting the impression you're afraid of the results after I factcheck your bull****.
 
Conservative said:
Sheik Yerbuti said:
No matter how you try to spin it -- 400,000 jobs added in September.


Jimmy Carter made George Bush look bad. Carter created 10 million jobs in 4 years compared to Bush creating 4 million jobs in 8 years.[/QUOTE


Tell that to the 25+ million unemployed and under employed. You certainly have that liberal compassion.
Click to expand...

I bet they would like to have Carter back considering he was up over twice as much in jobs over half the time period.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
It is almost 3 years later and there are still more unemployed than when he took office. How long are you going to blame Bush. Do they teach civics in school? What does Congress do and who controlled Congress in 2008. Democrats or Republicans? Be a good little liberal now and let them destroy your credibility.
Click to expand...
There were 8 million jobs lost to the Great Bush Recession, it will take time to recover from that. Meanwhile, we have a net gain of jobs since then.
 
Conservative said:
Writing a loan is one thing, signing on the dotted line is another. To blame the banks solely is ridiculous. Banks got their money by bundling the loans and selling them to Freddie and Fannie, both govt. agencies.
Click to expand...

I'm not blaming banks solely, but I think they deserve some blame. They knew these were bad loans, they wrote them anyway and Bush bailed them out. That's fine, I'm not necessarily saying that was a bad idea, and this isn't about that.

I do find it somewhat frustrating that after the government pulled these people's asses out of the fire, when they say "Hey, maybe you could pay a little more in taxes since we blew a big wad of cash saving your ass," there's cries of "Class Warfare!" Instead, the counter proposals are to take it out of Social Security, Medicare, and to raise taxes on the working class. Really?

Let's say you and your friend buy a couple of 6 packs on Friday night, and your friend drinks 9 out of the 12. Would you be wrong to ask him to contribute a little more the next time you guys have some brews?
 
rocket88 said:
I'm not blaming banks solely, but I think they deserve some blame. They knew these were bad loans, they wrote them anyway and Bush bailed them out. That's fine, I'm not necessarily saying that was a bad idea, and this isn't about that.

I do find it somewhat frustrating that after the government pulled these people's asses out of the fire, when they say "Hey, maybe you could pay a little more in taxes since we blew a big wad of cash saving your ass," there's cries of "Class Warfare!" Instead, the counter proposals are to take it out of Social Security, Medicare, and to raise taxes on the working class. Really?

Let's say you and your friend buy a couple of 6 packs on Friday night, and your friend drinks 9 out of the 12. Would you be wrong to ask him to contribute a little more the next time you guys have some brews?
Click to expand...

So we are going to only ask bankers and UAW workers to pay a tax increase?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
400,000 ...

BLS says so ...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data



Now where's that book title, Con? Why are you so afraid to tell me? I am getting the impression you're afraid of the results after I factcheck your bull****.
Click to expand...

What as the net job change? you know what net means, don't you? My bet is you are also someone who gets a paycheck and has no idea that your expenses have to come out of it.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
There were 8 million jobs lost to the Great Bush Recession, it will take time to recover from that. Meanwhile, we have a net gain of jobs since then.
Click to expand...

Let me know what civics told you about how our govt. runs. How did Bush alone create the 8 million job losses and what did the Democrat Congress in 2007-2011 do to prevent it? Doesn't speak well of Obama and the Democrats, does it?
 
rocket88;1059854843]I'm not blaming banks solely, but I think they deserve some blame. They knew these were bad loans, they wrote them anyway and Bush bailed them out. That's fine, I'm not necessarily saying that was a bad idea, and this isn't about that.
Click to expand...

Bush had no authority to bail them or anyone else out, Congress had to authorize the spending. Congress under Democrat control with Obama voting yes, gave Bush the money to bail out the banks. Bush spent 350 billion of the 700 billion and left 350 billion for Obama. Most of the money loaned has been repaid so where did that appear on the budget of the U.S.? Hint, it didn't

I do find it somewhat frustrating that after the government pulled these people's asses out of the fire, when they say "Hey, maybe you could pay a little more in taxes since we blew a big wad of cash saving your ass," there's cries of "Class Warfare!" Instead, the counter proposals are to take it out of Social Security, Medicare, and to raise taxes on the working class. Really?
Click to expand...

Like far too many you buy what the media tells you. Some of the banks didn't want the money and the big ones have paid back the loans with interest. Where are the counter proposals to take money out of SS and Medicare? Raising taxes on the working class? You mean the 65 million working class that don't pay any FIT?


Let's say you and your friend buy a couple of 6 packs on Friday night, and your friend drinks 9 out of the 12. Would you be wrong to ask him to contribute a little more the next time you guys have some brews?
Click to expand...

Have you ever looked at the budget of the United States? Tell me what part of that budget the rich get more benefit out of than the middle class? Stop buying the rhetoric and get the facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom