Page 19 of 36 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 355

Thread: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

  1. #181
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Mickey Shane View Post
    Having the house wouldn't be enough to pass a tax break for the wealthy. However, should the GOP attain even more power than that, they would definitely pass tax breaks for the wealthiest of Americans. They always do. I would say the same thing then: That there's nothing that I could do about it.
    I'm sure. Then what are you even a part of this board?

    I don't drive a cab.
    What?

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  2. #182
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    As to your first question, the answer is that for most small businesses the income of the company is considered income for the owner. So the two numbers are added together to get the same 500K.

    On your second point for some it is a matter of equity. If you are going to get rid of the Bush tax cuts because we can't afford them, fine. But Obama is saying get rid of about 25% of the cuts and retain the other 75%. Others feel that at this stage of our economic recovery we can't afford to take any money out of the economy. Some will say that this will inhibit some small business owners from adding employees as they get to keep an ever decreasing amount of what they earn. Let's remember that this 4% is only one increase these people will be paying. In many states, which are also broke they have also raised the percent of income tax imposed on the highest earners.
    Also remember that the health care bill calls for an additional 3.8% of certain income for upper income earners.
    So Obama and company have done a nice job of isolating each increase and saying what's the big deal. Without having an hosest debate and putting all the increases together and explaining why that is the right way to go.

    Hope this helps.
    That portion of the health care legistlation doesn't take effect until 2014. Letting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire this year wouldn't have anything to do with that for another 3 years. Therefore, it's a baseless argument.

  3. #183
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,679

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    typical liberal lie. the tax cuts affect everyone. except of course those that don't pay taxes...and I guess that is what upsets liberals the most.

    "ooooh look, that greedy rich guy got $10K tax break and I didn't get anything."

    no **** sherlock, that evil rich guy paid $200k in taxes and you paid zippo. of course you didn't get a tax cut. you can't cut taxes any lower than 0%.

    (actually you can, earned income credit pays poor people more in refund than what they paid in.)

    and that is what pisses me off the most. the biggest proponents of "tax the rich", "the rich aren't paying their fair share" are the very people who pay the least amount of taxes of anybody.
    we actually should make the working poor and middle class pay much more in income taxes. They use far more in government services (by sheer numbers) than the people who pay most of the taxes (the top 5%) and until we make this massive voting group pay more taxes, they will continue to vote for tax and spend dems. Their votes are bought by dem promises that the dems will give them more government goodies paid for by the "rich"

    as long as that goes on, this group will keep voting for more goodies and more tax hikes on the group that cannot outvote them



  4. #184
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    09-10-10 @ 04:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    3

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    It's their money, if they want to hold it it's none of your, or the Gov't business what they do with their wealth.
    Not when 2% of the population is holding the economy hostage by holding 2 trillion dollars back from the American market unless they are given a few billion dollar tax credit. Also, there is nothing forcing them to invest that money in OUR economy anyway. They hate paying American wages and just keep sending OUR jobs overseas to places where people will work for $2 a day. Forget the Mexicans, the large corporations are the ones steeling our jobs.

    Would you rather work in IT or cleaning toilets?

  5. #185
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by BlazingJustice View Post
    Not when 2% of the population is holding the economy hostage by holding 2 trillion dollars back from the American market unless they are given a few billion dollar tax credit. Also, there is nothing forcing them to invest that money in OUR economy anyway. They hate paying American wages and just keep sending OUR jobs overseas to places where people will work for $2 a day. Forget the Mexicans, the large corporations are the ones steeling our jobs.

    Would you rather work in IT or cleaning toilets?
    They're scared to invest because of people like you in office proposing onerous regulations and billions in new taxes.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  6. #186
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by BlazingJustice View Post
    Not when 2% of the population is holding the economy hostage by holding 2 trillion dollars back from the American market unless they are given a few billion dollar tax credit. Also, there is nothing forcing them to invest that money in OUR economy anyway. They hate paying American wages and just keep sending OUR jobs overseas to places where people will work for $2 a day. Forget the Mexicans, the large corporations are the ones steeling our jobs.

    Would you rather work in IT or cleaning toilets?
    Large corporations are not stealing your jobs. They are sending manufacturing jobs overseas because it is cheaper to make over their (makes sense) and they are hiring people here that are better at other service jobs (like engineering, health care, etc). It just takes time for the market to adjust, but it makes us all better off.

    Take where I work for example, we do a lot of engineering work for big mines in south america. We are exporting a service. They are making the raw materials. We do a lot of analysis for data, but sometimes we need to have someone write a program, so we call up our programmers in india. If I have an IT question or need some software I call up our IT customer support from somewhere else.

  7. #187
    Cynical Optimist
    jambalaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Last Seen
    11-28-12 @ 05:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,481

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by tlmorg02 View Post
    I am neither threatening nor blaming them for anything, I am simply saying the easiest way to stimulate the economy is to tax the rich at the levels prior to 2001, when they were still rich by the way, and give credits to those who create jobs, that way they can be rewarded for creating jobs, and the rest of the breaks give to those who will buy more, that is the Middle Class who make-up 98% of the population and can buy more things as a whole. Then the economy moves and jobs are created and the wealthy see more money because more products are being sold.
    Just one significant correction. The middle class even by the most optomistic estimates represents no more than 45% of the country.

  8. #188
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by BlazingJustice View Post
    Not when 2% of the population is holding the economy hostage by holding 2 trillion dollars back from the American market unless they are given a few billion dollar tax credit. Also, there is nothing forcing them to invest that money in OUR economy anyway. They hate paying American wages and just keep sending OUR jobs overseas to places where people will work for $2 a day. Forget the Mexicans, the large corporations are the ones steeling our jobs.

    Would you rather work in IT or cleaning toilets?
    And you have to look no further than Ronald Reagan to thank as the person who destroyed America's manufacturing base. No wonder he is the idol of Corporate America and the Republican party.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  9. #189
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    we actually should make the working poor and middle class pay much more in income taxes. They use far more in government services (by sheer numbers) than the people who pay most of the taxes (the top 5%) and until we make this massive voting group pay more taxes, they will continue to vote for tax and spend dems. Their votes are bought by dem promises that the dems will give them more government goodies paid for by the "rich"

    as long as that goes on, this group will keep voting for more goodies and more tax hikes on the group that cannot outvote them
    Clearly, you didn't take the time to think this through. How can a poor man pay anymore than he currently possess? If he has given of his last available cent, what more can he give? Asking the so-called "working poor" to pay more in taxes - a segment of society that as you've clearly stated relies heavily on government assistance in order to survive - is in effect pushing them into object poverty! You may as well make them all homeless now then to them to contribute economically.

    Now, it is true that the poor will typically vote for any candidate they believe is for "them" - those who are struggling who really want to move up that economic ladder but just can't -- the deck is stacked heavily against them - but there are ways to help move them forward economically and, if done correctly, can prove to make a poor person more economically viable. My suggestion:

    Tie social service programs w/education and training that lead to job placement. We do this with college students already, i.e., student graduate employment placement and referrals. Why not extend this same outreach to our state's welfare systems? In my state, Alamaba for example, this is done by marginally. People who lose their jobs and subsequently apply for unemployment benefits, for example, in some cases are offered "skills re-training," but what's missing is a pairing of one's current skills with the training OR informing and/or assisting individuals in transitioning from one professional skill into another especially where there is clear evidence that a specific skill or trade is being phased out, i.e., computer repair technician, and is being replaced by another, i.e., network engineer. To illustrate what I mean, consider the following:

    Computers aren't the big, complicated machines they use to be from 15-20 years ago. It use to be that in order to repair them you had to know alot about the different motherboards, IRQ settings/switches, the various types of hard-drives, and know how to read tons of code. But now, computers are smallers, easy to assemble and change out compoments, and the software can pretty much diagnos itself and make those difficult IRQ settings themselves. Furthermore, plug&play and USB technology has made home computing so much easier. My 9-yr old daughter even knows how to plug in a USB thumb drive or mouse (not to mention they make those things wireless now...how 'bout that!?!)

    It's no wonder most people who find themselves unemployed have no problem with staying home and collecting a paycheck. If the job market is sketchy, they're not going to pound the pavement that hard. If they are getting up in age and believe their skills aren't going to be utilized anyway, can you blame them for not trying to hard to find work again? And if they don't see an area in the jobs sector where they honestly believe an employer can use their skills either because that sector is saturated or is on the verge of going the way of the dinosour and they can't afford to go back to school and be re-trained, really...what's the use?

    The system has it wrong and every state to its own needs to really reconsider "work-fare" and not "welfare". Our nation will always have poor people. It's just the way it is. The goal should always be to empower people so that they have access to meaningful education and skills training so that they can find meaningful work and, thereby, pay their own way through society thereby leaving our nation in better hands to the next generation that comes after. I don't think we're doing a very good job of that right now. The system needs to be changed. And that leads me back to the issue of taxes...

    I came across these article today and found them quite shocking!!

    "Senate Republicans unveil a plan to make Bush tax cuts permanent," By Lori Montgomery, Washington Post Staff Writer, dated Wednesday, September 15, 2010; 3:16 AM

    Senate Republicans are rolling out a plan to permanently extend an array of expiring tax breaks that would deprive the Treasury of more than $4 trillion over the next decade, nearly doubling projected deficits over that period unless dramatic spending cuts are made.

    Aides to McConnell said they have yet to receive a cost estimate for the measure. But the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently forecast that a similar, slightly more expensive package that includes a full repeal of the estate tax would force the nation to borrow an additional $3.9 trillion over the next decade and increase interest payments on the national debt by $950 billion. That's more than four times the projected deficit impact of President Obama's health-care overhaul and stimulus package combined.
    And then there's the companion piece...

    "Putting the $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts in context," By Ezra Klein dated September 15, 2010; 9:26 AM ET

    (Graph not included herein; see article for details)

    There is no policy that President Obama has passed or proposed that added as much to the deficit as the Republican Party's $3.9 trillion extension of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, if you put aside Obama's plan to extend most, but not all, of the Bush tax cuts, there is no policy he has passed or proposed that would do half as much damage to the deficit. There is not even a policy that would do a quarter as much damage to the deficit.

    The stimulus bill, at $787 billion, would do about a fifth as much damage. But that's actually misleading: The stimulus bill was a temporary expense (not to mention a response to an unexpected emergency). Once it's done, it's done. An indefinite extension of the Bush tax cuts is, well, indefinite. It will cost $3.9 trillion in the first 10 years. And then it will cost more than that in the second 10 years. Call that number Y. And then it will cost more than Y in the third 10 years. And so on and on into eternity. Comparatively, the stimulus bill is a tiny fraction of that. The bank bailouts, which were passed by George W. Bush and the Democrats in 2006, will end up costing the government only $66 billion. The health-care bill improves the deficit outlook.

    Republicans and tea party candidates are both running campaigns based around concern for the deficit. But both, to my knowledge, support the single-largest increase in the deficit that anyone of either party has proposed in memory.
    To get an even better understanding of Sen. Boehner's economic plan, read what the (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities) had to say about his tax and budget proposals.

    The plan would require immediate cuts of $101 billion — or 21 percent[1] — in funding for discretionary programs other than those funded by the defense, homeland security, and military construction and veterans appropriations bills, as compared to their current (fiscal year 2010) funding levels adjusted for inflation (in other words, compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline).

    This would represent the deepest cut in funding for these programs from one year to the next in recent U.S. history .[2] Coming amidst the deepest economic downturn since the Depression, it would remove substantial purchasing power from the U.S. economy and thereby cost hundreds of thousands of jobs while heightening the risk of a double-dip recession. Rep. Boehner’s contrary claim that these cuts will “promote job creation” reflects a serious misunderstanding of basic macroeconomics under current economic conditions.
    I'll hold off commenting further until the CBO scores Sen. Boehner's proposal, but so far what he has proposed doesn't look very good. The interesting thing here is for all his (and some Republican's) talk of "limited government" (in spending, federal employees and authority), it's interesting to read that the only programs Boehner won't touch all happen to resolve around - the government (i.e., military, defense spending, VA, homeland security, etc.)
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-15-10 at 06:36 PM.

  10. #190
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,354

    Re: Obama will not extend Bush tax cuts to wealthy

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    That portion of the health care legistlation doesn't take effect until 2014. Letting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire this year wouldn't have anything to do with that for another 3 years. Therefore, it's a baseless argument.
    You did not address the state income taxes which are also going up. Not sure why a new tax already on the books does not count, but are entitled to an opinion even I think it is wrong.

Page 19 of 36 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... 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
  •