• 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!

Obama to call for new tax increases in State of the Union address

No, it must be conservatives who rubbed off on me. Remember, liberals don't care about the budget deficit.

Still no answer to the question, why does keeping more of what you earn mean an expense to the Federal Govt?
 
Because people elected representatives and senators on platforms to enact or keep those programs?



PS, got any "proof" of your persistent 35 year crusade against fed spending at 20% of GDP?

Just responding to a poster here who made that claim, we currently have a 17.4 trillion dollar economy which would mean a 3.5 trillion dollar Budget, Obama's will be 3.9 trillion
 
The apparently you are unaware of what the current deficit is despite all your blather. Cutting half of the military budget and then adding $200B create a budget surplus. Very rich considering you were being a jerk acting like I am the one who knows nothing of the federal budget and spending. :lamo

Cutting half the military would make China and Russia the strongest in the world, guess that doesn't bother you but you still don't get it and never will, cutting the military in half, cutting Transportation will do nothing about the 18.2 trillion dollar debt

I am responding to your posts and it is obvious to me that you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Cutting half the military would make China and Russia the strongest in the world, guess that doesn't bother you but you still don't get it and never will, cutting the military in half, cutting Transportation will do nothing about the 18.2 trillion dollar debt

I am responding to your posts and it is obvious to me that you have no idea what you are talking about.

says the guy who just conflated debts and deficits?

Wow.
Bold strategy, Cotton.
 
In the liberal world there never is enough govt. enough taxes and enough money to social engineer

The new taxes are designed to make sure that everybody pays their fair share and that loopholes become a thing of the past.

How much are the wars in the Middle east costing US, along with all of those defense contracts, and since the 1% have all of the loopholes and dodges, who do you think is payin for it?

"Liberals". You don't have a clue dude, so you follow your leader.
 
I guess the reason that the status quo is the status quo is because we made it like it is because we desire it to be like it is. Status quo isn't necessarily a bad thing, at least when it's a good thing.

Sometimes I get accused of being a class warrior, but that really befuddles me because I'm not a radical at all. Our income distribution system isn't terribly out of whack with the system we have (mostly because we DO have a progressive income tax system), and all I desire to do is to fine tune it to the point that all income classes grow in income at more or less the same rate, like they did in the "good ole days".

I think you're over estimating our influence. You look at it realistically and we're only given status quo candidates to choose from -- not really a choice.

I don't know about the distribution system not being out of whack, what, with the report just out that half the world's wealth is held by the 1%?

I mean, I'm not crying too loud I'll admit I'm in the top 20%, but for me to break into the top 10 or 5% is near impossible compared to the lower classes being able to move up to the top 25% or 20%. It is the policies of the status quo which make this impossibility happen.
 
Of course not but the question remains why is it the Federal Government's responsibility to pay 20% of our GDP for the bloated Federal Govt? Why is SS and Medicare on budget in the first place?

So what percent of our GDP should government be? If we subtracted SS and Medicare, I think it would be something in the range of 10%.
 
The new taxes are designed to make sure that everybody pays their fair share and that loopholes become a thing of the past.

How much are the wars in the Middle east costing US, along with all of those defense contracts, and since the 1% have all of the loopholes and dodges, who do you think is payin for it?

"Liberals". You don't have a clue dude, so you follow your leader.

I thought we put balance back into the tax code by raising income taxes on the wealthy back to 39.6% and by putting additional incomes taxes on them into the ACA.
 
The apparently you are unaware of what the current deficit is despite all your blather. Cutting half of the military budget and then adding $200B create a budget surplus. Very rich considering you were being a jerk acting like I am the one who knows nothing of the federal budget and spending. :lamo

Cutting half the military would make China and Russia the strongest in the world, guess that doesn't bother you but you still don't get it and never will, cutting the military in half, cutting Transportation will do nothing about the 18.2 trillion dollar debt

I am responding to your posts and it is obvious to me that you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
The new taxes are designed to make sure that everybody pays their fair share and that loopholes become a thing of the past.

How much are the wars in the Middle east costing US, along with all of those defense contracts, and since the 1% have all of the loopholes and dodges, who do you think is payin for it?

"Liberals". You don't have a clue dude, so you follow your leader.

LOL, fair share? Who defines what is a fair share for you to pay? Liberals love talking fairness as long as someone else pays for it. The military is the only sole responsibility of the Federal Govt and has given you the right to make a fool of yourself by saying what you want to say when you want to say it. I would say that is a pretty good return on investment
 
Cutting half the military would make China and Russia the strongest in the world, guess that doesn't bother you but you still don't get it and never will, cutting the military in half, cutting Transportation will do nothing about the 18.2 trillion dollar debt

I am responding to your posts and it is obvious to me that you have no idea what you are talking about.

this comment wasn't worth reposting again to begin with, let alone on the same page of the thread.
 
I thought we put balance back into the tax code by raising income taxes on the wealthy back to 39.6% and by putting additional incomes taxes on them into the ACA.

Oh that's not nearly enough for the far left "progressives".... until it's 75% again (circa 1968), they won't be happy. Hell they'd like it to be 91% circa 1950. Progressive indeed.... :lamo
Historical Individual Income Tax Parameters

OWS baby!
 
I thought we put balance back into the tax code by raising income taxes on the wealthy back to 39.6% and by putting additional incomes taxes on them into the ACA.

Taxes on the wealthy have been way down since Ronald Reagan and capital gains has become the new game in town. So incomes and rates have been horrible shape and worsened by loopholes. The poorer people and the lines of the middle class cannot afford such loopholes, so while percentages may say that they are up, real taxes paid by the wealthy have been way down for a generation now. What this tells us is that the corporate expansion through war that our government has been waging since the 50's is being shouldered by the middle class.
 
says the guy who just conflated debts and deficits?

Wow.
Bold strategy, Cotton.

Debt comes from deficits and Obama has had 7.6 trillion in deficits added to the debt. Cutting the military and transportation will do nothing to address the 18.2 trillion in debt and that is what we pay debt service on
 
LOL, fair share? Who defines what is a fair share for you to pay? Liberals love talking fairness as long as someone else pays for it. The military is the only sole responsibility of the Federal Govt and has given you the right to make a fool of yourself by saying what you want to say when you want to say it. I would say that is a pretty good return on investment

Where ever do you find such BS? The military is the sole responsibility of the government you say? Who pays for the military?
 
I thought we put balance back into the tax code by raising income taxes on the wealthy back to 39.6% and by putting additional incomes taxes on them into the ACA.

I think that depends on your point of view, and we probably haven't yet see the full effect of that.
 
Oh that's not nearly enough for the far left "progressives".... until it's 75% again (circa 1968), they won't be happy. Hell they'd like it to be 91% circa 1950. Progressive indeed.... :lamo
Historical Individual Income Tax Parameters

OWS baby!

back when real income of all quintiles experienced upward growth? A terrible idea indeed.
 
Oh that's not nearly enough for the far left "progressives".... until it's 75% again (circa 1968), they won't be happy. Hell they'd like it to be 91% circa 1950. Progressive indeed.... :lamo
Historical Individual Income Tax Parameters

OWS baby!

Once the take home incomes of all income classes are growing by about the same amount, I will be happy with the progressivity of our income tax system.

Of course I'm not a progressive though.
 
had to dig this one back up. Too funny

fR9ZNMp.jpg

Do you realize that when Reagan took office the GDP was 2.8 trillion dollars and using percentage ignores the base. When Reagan left office it was 5.6 trillion dollars or double. The higher the base the lower the percentage is going to be except with liberalism as there never is enough spending on the part of the Federal Govt.

Spending by Reagan generated a 1.7 trillion dollar debt that would be 3.5 trillion today in 8 years and he created 17 million jobs, got a 60% increase in FIT revenue, and gave Congress the money that THEY spent. Military spending wasn't what you think it was then
 
Debt comes from deficits and Obama has had 7.6 trillion in deficits added to the debt. Cutting the military and transportation will do nothing to address the 18.2 trillion in debt and that is what we pay debt service on

Enjoy moving your goalposts to cover your mistake(s).

With that said, IF ONLY Obummer had tripled our debt like St Ronald... can you imagine ?
 
So what percent of our GDP should government be? If we subtracted SS and Medicare, I think it would be something in the range of 10%.

Yes, I could live with taxes funding what they were supposed to fund thus a strong military, funding for the VA, funding for the agency to collect the federal tax dollars, Funding for a reduced role of Congress and that would take the budget down to about 1.2 trillion dollars.
 
Once the take home incomes of all income classes are growing by about the same amount, I will be happy with the progressivity of our income tax system.

Of course I'm not a progressive though.

If that were the case, taxes wouldn't need to be raised on one segment of society while lowered for others. I certainly wish that to be the case as well, but difficult to see how when part-time jobs are redefined, hours are cut, income goes down and has been for decades - yet taxes and more and more government programs and safety nets are created.
 
Enjoy moving your goalposts to cover your mistake(s).

With that said, IF ONLY Obummer had tripled our debt like St Ronald... can you imagine ?

Yeah, a liberal utopia, tripling the 10.6 trillion debt that Obama inherited vs. the 900 billion that Reagan inherited. You betcha, 1.7 trillion in debt in 8 years vs. 7.6 trillion in 6, obviously the 1.7 is much worse and created much more debt service than the 7.6 trillion, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom