• 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!

House Passes Middle-Class Tax Cut as Dems, GOP Try to Reach Compromise

TurtleDude said:
but you support raising taxes on those making more than 200K

do they have a duty to pay down the deficit while those who most caused it to get so big continue to get cuts

what incentive does the other 98% have to reign in spending and shrink the deficit when you dems only want the "rich" to have to pay for it
Click to expand...

...because you can not solve the budget problem with tax increases or spending cuts alone..... every one will feel some pain. Those that will not take some pain are just not serious about cutting the deficit.... which, BTW, is a secondary on people's minds to jobs.
 
upsideguy said:
...because you can not solve the budget problem with tax increases or spending cuts alone..... every one will feel some pain. Those that will not take some pain are just not serious about cutting the deficit.... which, BTW, is a secondary on people's minds to jobs.
Click to expand...

so you want the bottom 98% to have massive tax increases as well

its that group that doesn't pay enough taxes for the most part, not the top 2%
 
TurtleDude said:
so you want the bottom 98% to have massive tax increases as well

its that group that doesn't pay enough taxes for the most part, not the top 2%
Click to expand...

Logic, common sense, and even basic thinking isn't a strong suit of liberals.
 
Erod said:
Apparently you failed to notice that an entirely new market was created in the 1990s, and the subsequent dot-com boom.

It was called the internet. One of your heroes, Al Gore, claims to have created it right before he saved us all from global warming.

Taxes rates had NOTHING to do with the good times of the 90s. If anything, they kept it from being better.

The government wastes the money we give them, just like they would with tax increases now. That money would not go to the debt anyway, it would line the pockets of more foreign banks and butt-buddy companies to Obama. Just like the stimulus money did.
Click to expand...

Actually, the economic boom of the 90's was caused by the same phenomena that gave rise to the economic boom of the '80s. This boom had very little to do with taxes (which is true of most economic booms).

From the advent of the PC through the Internet boom we experience a technological revolution, akin to the industrial revolution, where affordable computer technology radically transformed business with real-time information the substantially improved efficiency and cut costs. The software industry as we know it today was essentially created in the 1980s. The commericalization of the Internet (which Al Gore is substantially responsible for through the 1988 High Performance Computer Act and the 1992 Information Infrastructure and Technology Acts, which he sponsored and co-sponsored, respectively) extended the technology revolution until 2000, when irrational exhuberence came to an end as markets finally woke up to ridiculous valuations ascribed to particular internet companies. When AOL was about to buy Time-Warner on its paper, Wall Street finally woke-up and the market began its slide the next week.... and then really fell flat after 9/11.

Certainly those political junkies among us want to abscribe credit to our favorite POTUS, be it Reagan or Clinton and their respective tax or fiscal policies for these good times, but they were minor players. They simply had policies that did not to screw up a good economy. The heroes of the technological revolution included Gates, Jobs, Groves, Ellison, McNeely, among others; not Clinton and Reagan.

As to tax increases..... no one likes them, nor will people really like the spending cuts. But, if you are serious about driving toward a balanced budget and are informed, you realize it will be a shared pain and it will require a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. People that offer one without any consideration of the other just are not serious about the deficit.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Logic, common sense, and even basic thinking isn't a strong suit of liberals.
Click to expand...

when it comes to economics, or gun control, or foreign policy, emotobabbbling is the usual paradigm
 
Will someone explain to me the American obsession with low taxes?
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Will someone explain to me the American obsession with low taxes?
Click to expand...

We dont like paying for things using tax dollars, but we love all the things we get using tax dollars!! Social security, medicare, financing wars, subsidies etc.
 
Last edited:
Patria Antiqua said:
Will someone explain to me the American obsession with low taxes?
Click to expand...

when you get old enough to start paying over half your income to the various taxes than maybe you will understand.

THe real obsession is from those who don't pay for what they use obsessing over increasing taxes on those who do
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Will someone explain to me the American obsession with low taxes?
Click to expand...

You see, most of us were raised learning personal responsibility vs. govt. responsibility. Lower taxes means more take home pay and thus the ability to spend the money as we see fit and thus need less govt. It does seem that many here never learned history and how our country was founded and the economic principles established. Too bad, it used to be a great country built out of a wonderful vision. Our Founders paid the price for poor choices but today there are no consequences for poor choices as far too many expect to be bailed out for those choices and that includes business.
 
Z3n said:
Yes. I support the repeal of Bush era tax cuts for people making a million dollars or more. It can help close the budget deficit and its bipartisanship, you know?

"People" like me? I don't have any particular envy of affluent Americans I just think that everyone needs to do their part?
Click to expand...

Turtledude says crap like that a lot, don't take it seriously....
 
UtahBill said:
Turtledude says crap like that a lot, don't take it seriously....
Click to expand...

That's fair-I don't take your populist and inconsistent rantings seriously at all either given you have no logical manner to your bloviations

the issue is not ending tax breaks on those making a million or more-its about people making 200K or more and nothing is worse than those who want others' taxes (those who already pay far more than their fair share) to increase while not wanting to pay more themselves.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Wow, you must really want that asshat of the year award:D

But seriously, good post. I agree with some of it.
Click to expand...

He is an amateur as an asshat....sort of like the Sarah Palin of candidates...:2razz:
 
Z3n said:
We dont like paying for things using tax dollars, but we love all the things we get using tax dollars!! Social security, medicare, financing wars, subsidies etc.
Click to expand...

SS and Medicare are funded by Payroll taxes, wars are funded by income taxes and 47% of the people aren't paying any Federal Income taxes. You think that is fair since those not paying taxes are the ones getting the subsidies and most of that so called govt. help? Now you want to raise the taxes on the top 2% as if that will make a difference in the deficit?
 
Conservative said:
SS and Medicare are funded by Payroll taxes, wars are funded by income taxes and 47% of the people aren't paying any Federal Income taxes. You think that is fair since those not paying taxes are the ones getting the subsidies and most of that so called govt. help? Now you want to raise the taxes on the top 2% as if that will make a difference in the deficit?
Click to expand...

But the 47% not paying taxes are probably supplying 98% of the enlisted troops...
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Will someone explain to me the American obsession with low taxes?
Click to expand...

I'm confused by the obsession of taking money from those who earned it.
In my opinion that should be kept as low as possible. The government isn't known for spending money wisely, so the less they are given, the better for the economy.
 
Conservative said:
You see, most of us were raised learning personal responsibility vs. govt. responsibility. Lower taxes means more take home pay and thus the ability to spend the money as we see fit and thus need less govt. It does seem that many here never learned history and how our country was founded and the economic principles established. Too bad, it used to be a great country built out of a wonderful vision. Our Founders paid the price for poor choices but today there are no consequences for poor choices as far too many expect to be bailed out for those choices and that includes business.
Click to expand...
So were you trying to offer an actual response, or just give me a discursive appeal to tradition?

TurtleDude said:
when you get old enough to start paying over half your income to the various taxes than maybe you will understand.

THe real obsession is from those who don't pay for what they use obsessing over increasing taxes on those who do
Click to expand...
My diabolical plan to teach Mediaeval history to high schoolers doesn't pay enough to be taxed quite that much.

I'm more concerned about the fact that teenagers are taxed without representation.

All the playing the ageism card has shown is that I'm in a position to look at taxes objectively, while you are not.
 
Barbbtx said:
I'm confused by the obsession of taking money from those who earned it.
In my opinion that should be kept as low as possible. The government isn't known for spending money wisely, so the less they are given, the better for the economy.
Click to expand...
Did they earn it on their own, or is their success due, in part, to a societal framework which is conducive to such prosperity? If the latter is true, then those whose profit from society owe that society the same opportunities that they capitalized on to enrich themselves.

When it comes to the wealthy, this means picking up the slack in tax revenues.
 
UtahBill said:
But the 47% not paying taxes are probably supplying 98% of the enlisted troops...
Click to expand...

So we get a tax deduction because someone from the family enlists? I actually wouldn't have a problem with that however I doubt that is the case.
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Did they earn it on their own, or is their success due, in part, to a societal framework which is conducive to such prosperity? If the latter is true, then those whose profit from society owe that society the same opportunities that they capitalized on to enrich themselves.

When it comes to the wealthy, this means picking up the slack in tax revenues.
Click to expand...

Who are you or anyone else to determine what a fair wage is? What makes the difference where they made their success? Seems to me the question that needs to be asked is why you have a problem with private sector profits which you have a choice to support and no concerns by govt. greed that takes from the producers and redistributes to others that don't? Profit is a four letter word to far too many which raises the issue of education. One of these days you are going to understand what it is like to pay over half your income in taxes while watching others demand more while paying very little.
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Did they earn it on their own, or is their success due, in part, to a societal framework which is conducive to such prosperity? If the latter is true, then those whose profit from society owe that society the same opportunities that they capitalized on to enrich themselves.

When it comes to the wealthy, this means picking up the slack in tax revenues.
Click to expand...

Something to think about

American Thinker: The Presidency that Saved America
 
Conservative said:
Who are you or anyone else to determine what a fair wage is? What makes the difference where they made their success? Seems to me the question that needs to be asked is why you have a problem with private sector profits which you have a choice to support and no concerns by govt. greed that takes from the producers and redistributes to others that don't? Profit is a four letter word to far too many which raises the issue of education. One of these days you are going to understand what it is like to pay over half your income in taxes while watching others demand more while paying very little.
Click to expand...
I honestly do not understand what your point is, or how you refuted what I said.

Maybe you could call me "sonny boy" or "young whippersnapper" some more. That should enhance your argument.
 
Patria Antiqua said:
Did they earn it on their own, or is their success due, in part, to a societal framework which is conducive to such prosperity?
Click to expand...

why don't you tell us

tell webb, manchin, lieberman, nelson, conrad, bayh...
 
The Prof said:
why don't you tell us

tell webb, manchin, lieberman, nelson, conrad, bayh...
Click to expand...
I prefer people to admit it rather than just taking it as axiom, but fine, I'm telling you, since you asked nicely.

Nobody gets rich purely on their own steam. Everyone in this society, no matter how rich or poor, owes their success partly to the society in which they live.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom