Funny, I don't see where any rich person hurt the middle class by keeping more of what they earn, not like the govt has done keeping people dependent. I find it interesting that there is only one ideology that doesn't care about what you make or how much you pay in taxes and another that basis their entire ideology out of class warfare and envy.mertex;1059140489]So What? You don't mind the middle-class getting screwed so the rich can get more money? You need to do a little research. Most of the ubber wealthy pay a lot lower rate (16%), because most of their income comes from capital gains. They also have many more tax shelters and loopholes than the middle class, so yes, the more money you make the more money you are going to pay, but if the rates are disproportionate, the middle class gets to keep less of their money than the rich.
As for rates all taxpayers got tax cuts at the same rates and thus proportionate, why do you care? Right now with the Bush tax cuts in place 47% of the income earners, all under 50,000 a year didn't pay any Federal Income taxes so that defeats your argument. You are the one that needs better research.
Oh, call it a little pet peeve of mine in that I think people should be able to decide how to spend their money vs. the Federal Govt. doing it. I guess no one has shown me that allowing the rich to keep more of what they earn has hurt me or my family nor will it. Maybe you ought to more concern about your own personal responsibilities.What is your "big" interest in protecting the wealthy people's tax cuts? We've already seen that the tax cuts didn't help the economy, neither did they provide jobs, so please explain what your interest is.
I asked you a simple question as to how long an unemployed should receive benefits for being unemployed and didn't get an answer. Right now it is two years which apparently isn't long enough for you.Don't tell me that you are being "fair" - because you don't seem to care about the unemployed losing their benefits.
Whether or not the wealthy are asking for it or not never was the issue. They have the ability to send more money to the govt anytime they want. Liberals seem to want the govt. to force that money back to the govt.Those not asking for the money back are the same wealthy that you are fighting for and of course they are not sending more to the Federal Government. Why not? Only a real dunce would not be able to answer that. Because everyone wants to keep more of their money. But, our country is in dire need, if anybody would want to help the country, the super wealthy should be the first, since they are the ones that can most afford it. Your party keeps saying no more deficit spending, but when it comes to the rich, they look the other way?
Our country is in dire need? Until spending gets under control I don't support sending an extra dime to the govt and the question is why do you? You really think that raising the taxes on the rich are going to lower the deficit? How naive are you or better yet, how old? Read a history book.
What I want is incentive for the middle class to become rich, even you. Penalizing one group or another reduces incentive.I don't care if the rich get to keep more of what they earn, I care that they get to keep more of what they earn than the middle-class person. Why don't you? Are you one of the super wealthy?
Really, what is that difference? The govt. giving the rich more of their own money? That makes sense to you? If the rich kept more of what they earn there wouldn't be any need to give any of it back.There is a difference in earning and keeping more of what one earns and giving the super wealthy big tax cuts so they get to keep more money than others that are not as wealthy.
He didn't give the rich a bigger tax cut, same percentage. If you don't make what the rich make whose fault is it? Please explain to me why 47% of the people in this country didn't pay any Federal Income taxes AFTER the Bush tax cuts?Yes, it is their money, so is my money mine. So, why did Bush give the super wealthy bigger tax cuts? Why are they allowed more loopholes so they don't have to pay as much. It seems to me that you don't understand what is going on. Faux News and Rush Limbaugh have got you so brainwashed - of course, commentators on Faux News and Rush Limbaugh are super wealthy, it is in their best interest.
No, there is no guarantee of that but what it does guarantee is that it will change human behavior. You keep using the 700 Billion number as if it were gospel, what is it going to take for you to question the projections made by this Administration. They cannot even tell what is going to happen this year let alone 5-10 years down the road. Keep buying the rhetoric.By the very nature that the super rich will be paying more in taxes, that will increase revenue. Plus, not having to borrow $700B to give them the tax cuts (that is what it will cost the U.S.), that is $700B money the gov saves.
TARP was a Bush program and the Stimulus was Obama's. TARP bailed out the banks and most of the money has been paid back. Obama's stimulus led to 4 million more unemployed Americans and another 3 trillion added to the debt. you tell me which one was successful.Well, your party seem to think that the Stimulus and the Tarp were only hurting the country, why don't they feel the same about the tax cuts for the super wealthy? They are all about the same amount of money. The difference being, the Stimulus and the Tarp were an effort to help the economy, the tax cuts for the rich are an effort to help only the rich.
Because the 700 billion in tax cuts is a 10 year projection and is actually allowing people to keep more of what they earned.Well, it seems to have made Tea Partiers better had the Stimulus $700B, and the Tarp $700B were not spent, so how come the $700B tax cuts don't seem to bother them anymore?
.Don't rewrite History. It is a fact that Bush's policies (tax cuts for the rich and two unnecessary wars) put the country in the toilet. Obama has been trying, even against the efforts of the Republican party to thwart them, to help the economy recover as well help those hit by the recession, and there has been some progress made. Bush outsourced a lot of our work to China and other countries, you have that to be proud of
I wish you would read history before you claim someone else is re-writing it. Democrats have controlled Congress for 4 years so don't give me this crap about the Republicans, your party lost on November 2 in a good shellacking
Right 16 million Americans are unemployed and not being paid by corporations. Your outrage over profits is quite telling.And, as a matter of fact, Corporations are doing great in profits, but are still not hiring. Are they just trying to keep more money to themselves?
Something's Wrong With This Picture: Corporations Have Most Profitable Quarter in U.S. History as Unemployment Soars
According to a new report (PDF) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. corporate profits are at an all-time high, despite the turbulent economy. At the same time, the real unemployment rate remains astronomically high, affecting some 1 in 5 Americans.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers
I just don't think taking from people just because they have more than I do, is fair.
Everyone should have skin in the game. I don't think it would be right for me to vote for higher taxes on the rich but not on myself. That's why I am a conservative and vote Republican.
I think everyone should pay the same %. The more you make, the more you pay and no class envy at least over income taxes. No holding yourself of your business back in fear of higher tax brackets either. Like Obamacare, if you employ over 50 people it'll cost you dearly. Who in their right mind with 45 employees will decide to expand?
Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
I wonder how many will be wondering where their "cut" is when all is said and done.
Look at the title of this thread "House passes Middle-Class Tax Cut" Many of those who don't keep up with Dem speak will be looking for that "tax cut" on their paychecks.
Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.