• 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.
Honestly, I can't believe some people are actually defending millionaires against just a little tax increase.

They can afford it. They won't go hungry. They won't have to move in with mom.

There is no logical, rational, nor common-sense reason to oppose a small tax-increase on the wealthy.

That is why most of the country agrees with Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy to help reduce the deficit.
 
This seems to be a common theme with so-called conservatives. They purport to believe in radical individual freedom but in the next breath state that they would sack any employee who holds a political view different from theirs.

I suspect the right attempts to hide this sort of anti-American tendency of the authoritarian to stifle dissent - in this case using the power of employment to force employees to cower in silent intimidation. However, it is a good thing this has come out and is now in the public for all to see.
 
That is why most of the country agrees with Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy to help reduce the deficit.

One quick question. If we have been borrowing money at a tremendous rate, and we continue borrowing. If we raise taxes on the wealthy, we will still be borrowing just not as much. Because the rich are "subsidizing" in a way. correct?
 
That is why most of the country agrees with Obama's plan to raise taxes on the wealthy to help reduce the deficit.

No the reason is that it does impact them. My guess is you will not pay any more taxes ( if you pay any now) under this proposal.
 
This seems to be a common theme with so-called conservatives. They purport to believe in radical individual freedom but in the next breath state that they would sack any employee who holds a political view different from theirs.

Poliical correctness is far more a trait of the left.
 
the more money you make, the more you can afford to pay in taxes. its simple, its logical, its not rocket science.

and some people can even afford to pay just a little more in taxes without it affecting their spending even one single bit.


However, people that defend the tax breaks for the wealthiest when the middle class is hurting are the best PR tool the Democrats have in convincing the moderates and independents not to vote GOP! There is a silver lining to every cloud that calls the middle class parasites! :cool:
 
However, people that defend the tax breaks for the wealthiest when the middle class is hurting are the best PR tool the Democrats have in convincing the moderates and independents not to vote GOP! There is a silver lining to every cloud that calls the middle class parasites! :cool:

The tax break is that capital gains are taxed lower. I've yet to see this addressed.
 
you miss the obvious point. until the masses suffer tax increases they have no incentive to ever demand less spending

The rich demand more wasteful spending, like the war in Iraq, and a military that is 3 times larger than it needs to be. If they do not suffer tax increases they have no incentive to ever demand less wasteful spending.
 
'
do some research--that has been posted on this board dozens of times

I have, which is why i find your statement odd.

and again I find it hilarious that a supposed libertarian supports government confiscation of wealth

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? As it stands, the federal government has issued more than $14 trillion in stock debt of which more than 70% is held by American interests. It really does not matter how you feel about taxation or future tax increases. Our government owes the American people THEIR WEALTH. Your mindless set of policy solutions in no way position our government to make good on its dues.

Unless of course you support confiscation of wealth via default.
 
I doubt you have done anything that has made me richer so you can forget about me giving you anything. but your hatred of the rich is both expected and a bit pathological

I do not waste my time or energy hating anyone, hatred only empowers those who the hatred is directed at. When rich folks take advantage of tax breaks and loop holes not available to the rest of the society that enables them to accumulate more wealth, hedge funds, stock manipulation, speculating, using tax payer monies to relocate businesses to foreign countries, outsourcing, credit cards, mortgage lending and the list goes on, want to help me out? I am sure you can add to it

Now try not to hate me I am just a normal american, I worked hard with my hands and mind and made a good living. When I see a poor person I don't look at them as lazy parasites or leaches I think to myself there but for the grace of god go I
 
as did those in the military I suppose. but I have neither. all the wars did was drive up the cost of ammunition. I am a competitive shooter and the cost of 9mm and 5.56mm ammo went up several dollars a 50 due to the war. Thus the war cost me money

How about the thousands that lost arms or legs??? And you think you suffered because the war caused the price to go up for your sport??? That is a pretty damn sick perspective.
 
Have you missed THunder's posts? what do you think Obumble does when he spews blatant lies that the rich don't pay their fair share?

Turtle ill ask you again for a source or any historical evidence to these claims:

"too many people want too much government that others are taxed to pay for

that leads to politicians pandering to the many by promising them more and more handouts combined with a claim that OTHERS will pay for those things"

Do you have any historical sources or any sources?
Please...
Ill be waiting..
 
One quick question. If we have been borrowing money at a tremendous rate, and we continue borrowing. If we raise taxes on the wealthy, we will still be borrowing just not as much. Because the rich are "subsidizing" in a way. correct?

Its not clear to me what your are asking. Please clarify.
 
No the reason is that it does impact them. My guess is you will not pay any more taxes ( if you pay any now) under this proposal.

If you were correct in your assumption that most people have no concern about the nations debt that all of us have to pay down, that might be true. Personally, I would be willing to give up my middle class tax cut, but I realize that most of the middle class is hurting worse than I am, and I realize that the middle class having enough money to be consumers is what makes our economy thrive.
 
The tax break is that capital gains are taxed lower. I've yet to see this addressed.

That was indeed one of the tax breaks, but be patient, when the economy gets a little stronger, attention will be turned in that direction, as you are correct to point out that it should be.
 
It's not applying tax breaks/credits/loopholes. Yeah, 39.6% is the technical rate but after all breaks and such he actually only pays 15%.

So in other words Buffett is paying less because he wants to not because the government said this is what you'll pay.
 
That was indeed one of the tax breaks, but be patient, when the economy gets a little stronger, attention will be turned in that direction, as you are correct to point out that it should be.

Buffetts salary is 100K. Sorry, I've had my fill of future promises as they are never addressed.
 
So in other words Buffett is paying less because he wants to not because the government said this is what you'll pay.

Yes, despite his rhetoric, he has made the decision to get paid in a way that gaurantee's him less in taxes.
 
So in other words Buffett is paying less because he wants to not because the government said this is what you'll pay.

Like everyone else, Buffett pays what he has to pay. Another billionaire voices his opinion:

"So be Patriotic. Go out there and get rich. Get so obnoxiously rich that when that tax bill comes , your first thought will be to choke on how big a check you have to write. Your 2nd thought will be “what a great problem to have”, and your 3rd should be a recognition that in paying your taxes you are helping to support millions of Americans that are not as fortunate as you."

-- Mark Cuban
 
It won’t hurt the rich to pay more tax but it won’t help the economy either. This is political theater.

I not certain by what standard you suggest it will not help the economy. Allowing the "temporary" tax reduction of 2001 to expire will return the tax rate structure to what it was (last time the economy was truly healthy), which will act to move toward deficit reduction while placing the burden therefore on those most able to bear it. It does not solve the problem, rather its a relatively painless way to make a giant step in the right direction.
 
I not certain by what standard you suggest it will not help the economy. Allowing the "temporary" tax reduction of 2001 to expire will return the tax rate structure to what it was (last time the economy was truly healthy), which will act to move toward deficit reduction while placing the burden therefore on those most able to bear it. It does not solve the problem, rather its a relatively painless way to make a giant step in the right direction.

It will make a very small step. That isn't an arguement for no revenue enhancements, I've mentioned my thoughts on capital gains many times, but the increases Obama talks about (so far it's only talk) is more likely going to have a very small deficit reduction footprint. Especially if Obama continues on his desire to spend, spend, spend.
 
Defense_Spending_by_Country-570x268.jpg
Why is it that liberals and progressives(all the same) always worry about how much money is going to the Federal Govt. instead of focusing on how the govt. spends that money?

I agree. I for one, see no reason for our government to spend 6x more than any other country on "defense". It seems to me the cost of our futile imperialism is about $500B per year too much.
 
Buffetts salary is 100K. Sorry, I've had my fill of future promises as they are never addressed.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that Obama is proposing an income tax rate increase, but that does not appear to be the case. It looks like he is proposing exactly what you suggested he should do:

"Rather than an increase in tax rates, President Obama is proposing to eliminate the loopholes and tax breaks."
"Buffett's Rule" Proposes New Taxes On Wealthy | Neon Tommy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom