Page 3 of 76 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 758

Thread: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

  1. #21
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,732

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by thenextera View Post
    the gop cannot specifically say how they are going to raise revenue without raising taxes. They gave a vague statement with no substance. Likewise, the dems need to compromise and show specific cuts and not just to defense.

    Are people finally starting to see how the two sides are failing or are there still those out there that feel "their" side is the good guys and the other is the bad guy?
    ^^ exactly ^^
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

  2. #22
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,336

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue_State View Post
    The unlimited debt ceiling should never be on the table. Who would think that is ok? I would be ok to them tying it to a percentage of the GDP, but not a unlimited ceiling.
    What is the point of a debt ceiling as opposed to an unlimited debt ceiling if all that needs to be done is raise it a couple of times a year?

    I would be in favor of a debt ceiling that cannot be raised for any reason. Maybe if government had a finite amount of money to deal with some of the hard choices would be made.

  3. #23
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    When you cut programs, which we need to do as well, you mostly effect the middle and lower class. Why should the upper class, yet again, get a pass?
    I do have one confusing thing on this.

    I routinely hear, when people bring up the tax burden of the upper class, others try and suggest that in reality the "rich" benefit the most from the government's spending and programs and thus SHOULD pay a disproportionate amount.

    However....

    When talk of cutting spending comes up, the same kind of people typically suggest that it's the middle and lowe classes tha twill be hurt most by that.

    How exactly does that convienet dichotomy work?

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
    What is the point of a debt ceiling as opposed to an unlimited debt ceiling if all that needs to be done is raise it a couple of times a year?
    The whole point of a ceiling is that it SHOULDN'T be raised each year. Just because that's the way it's being done, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. Removing the debt ceiling would be the equivalent of saying that it is ok to raise the debt ceiling each year, which it isn't an ok thing to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
    I would be in favor of a debt ceiling that cannot be raised for any reason. Maybe if government had a finite amount of money to deal with some of the hard choices would be made.
    I wouldn't go so far as to say it NEVER can be raised, but I would put serious restrictions as to the reason it could be raised. Definitley not like it is being done now.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The GOP is doing the EXACT same thing by saying they REFUSE to sign ANYTHING that raises taxes.
    Accept they're at least going to a compromised position.

    Obama "I will not do any deal that does not raise revenue specifically through raising the tax rate on brackets above $250,000"

    Republicans "We don't want to increase taxes at all, but we're willing to increase them through removal of loopholes and deductions...even in a way that primarily affects those making above $250,000."

    The Republicans are at least agreeing to the notion of INCREASING the amount of tax revenue we bring in by increasing the tax burden on individuals. They're not agreeing to do it in the same way the President wants, but they're agreeing to the premise. The President is basically saying that they have to do it in his specific way or no deal.

    Now there's nothing wrong with Obama doing that....it's his perogative, especially after the election. But to attempt to suggest that the two sides are acting the same here is ridiculous. One side is refusing to give an inch, the other side is giving half an inch but not the other half.

  6. #26
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The GOP cannot SPECIFICALLY say HOW they are going to raise revenue without raising taxes. They gave a vague statement with no substance. Likewise, the Dems need to compromise and show specific cuts and not just to defense.

    Are people finally starting to see how the two sides are failing or are there still those out there that feel "their" side is the good guys and the other is the bad guy?
    Absolutely agree here. The GOP needs to put forth, at the very least, a general proposed "we can do these specific loopholes" plan initially. If they want to work with Democrats afterwards to tweak that, so be it. But they need some specifics.

    That said...for a side that continues to talk about needing to take a "balanced approach" to dealing with our defiict problem, there's a definite problem. Refusing to talk about anything right now other than tax cuts and putting spending cuts off till later, ignoring the fact that CURRENT spending levels are artificially inflated due to the massive increase for supposedly "emergency" reasons over the past few years and using current spending as the "normal" baseline, and attempting to claim common sense occuring things as a large portion of your "Cuts" is ridiculous.

    We're not going to see antyhing worth while done because neither side is going to show an honest, good faith, reasonable bending on the portion of this they don't want to deal with.

  7. #27
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,562

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Gehrig View Post
    Or, you know, the President is being realistic and facing the stone cold fact that we can't balance the budget without raising taxes.
    How is balancing a week (or two) of federal spending anything but a token to appease those that envy the rich? Realistic budgets get approved by at least one's own party in congress.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  8. #28
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Gehrig View Post
    Or, you know, the President is being realistic and facing the stone cold fact that we can't balance the budget without raising taxes.
    Realistic would involve raising taxes.......and not functioning off emergency inflated spending levels as "the norm", and not putting off spending cuts, and not using things that will happen regardless of your deal as a primary point of your "cutting".

    The President isn't being realistic. He's just being unrealistic in a different way than the republicans.

  9. #29
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Blue State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,732

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The whole point of a ceiling is that it SHOULDN'T be raised each year. Just because that's the way it's being done, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. Removing the debt ceiling would be the equivalent of saying that it is ok to raise the debt ceiling each year, which it isn't an ok thing to do.



    I wouldn't go so far as to say it NEVER can be raised, but I would put serious restrictions as to the reason it could be raised. Definitley not like it is being done now.
    Remove the debt ceiling, and I believe we can destroy the world economy.
    We went from sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me to safe spaces.

  10. #30
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,336

    Re: No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The whole point of a ceiling is that it SHOULDN'T be raised each year. Just because that's the way it's being done, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. Removing the debt ceiling would be the equivalent of saying that it is ok to raise the debt ceiling each year, which it isn't an ok thing to do.



    I wouldn't go so far as to say it NEVER can be raised, but I would put serious restrictions as to the reason it could be raised. Definitley not like it is being done now.
    We are in agreement. The debt ceiling should be the debt ceiling. Like the rest of us, Congress needs to establish priorities and stick to them. If the need is felt to go to war, or give away free cell phones, or buy Midwest votes by forcing the rest of us to use corn liquor to power our vehicles, that money should come from the funds available.

    I've sometimes wondered why the debt ceiling is not a Constitutional amendment. Past adjusting for inflation, Congress should live within its own budget.

Page 3 of 76 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •