• 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 middle class tax cut extension

DaveFagan said:
That sounds correct. Dems want to share tax collections with the majority and the Repubs want to give it to the 1%.
Click to expand...

you are confused as usual. the top one percent are paying 40% of the taxes and the top 5% pay more of the fed taxes than the rest of the country combined. The dems want them to pay even more. the dems don't share tax collections with the majority, they use it to buy the votes of their pawns by increasing government
 
cpwill said:
From that famous right-wing rag The New York Times. :)
Click to expand...
You think Uwe Reinhardt is some kind of radical left-winger? :lol:


The :lamo laughter was for your FDR comment. Will you be changing your lean to Libertarian as well?!?
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
you are confused as usual. the top one percent are paying 40% of the taxes and the top 5% pay more of the fed taxes than the rest of the country combined. The dems want them to pay even more. the dems don't share tax collections with the majority, they use it to buy the votes of their pawns by increasing government
Click to expand...

Oh yet again..
How much WEALTH does the 1% have?
 
Fruityfact said:
Oh yet again..
How much WEALTH does the 1% have?
Click to expand...

How hard have you worked and for that work, how much wealth have you accumulated? Have you started a business?
 
DVSentinel said:
And exactly how do we help the housing industry? Face it, it will never return to level it was and until the glut of pre-existing homes is cleared up, there really is no way to return jobs to construction. Many of these individuals who work in that sector are just going to have to find different work. Recovery in this market sector is just going to take a very long time. This is not even a problem in all areas, in my local area, housing contruction is still going on at a pretty good pace, but we never really crashed either. The only way those areas affected are going to recover soon to any level is if they somehow recreated the conditions that caused the bubble, but creating a new bubble just means it will burst latter down the road, not a good idea.
Click to expand...
No, I don't want to create a bubble. But taking away the mortgage interest deduction isn't going to help matters, either.
 
OpportunityCost said:
The housing industry cannot get back on track until median wages and the housing price index get in better shape. The cost of a house needs to be in the 2.5 to 2.9 multiplier of median income to get sales going again. They still arent. Wages are still low, and likely to remain that way as well as hiring---IE housing prices will not be rising because there are not many buyers right now. You cant mandate something to grow, there are enough tax breake built into the housing market, the prices are still high in comparison to median wages.
Click to expand...
To which built-in breaks do you refer?
 
TurtleDude said:
you are confused as usual. the top one percent are paying 40% of the taxes and the top 5% pay more of the fed taxes than the rest of the country combined. The dems want them to pay even more. the dems don't share tax collections with the majority, they use it to buy the votes of their pawns by increasing government
Click to expand...
While the 1% directly buy and influence the 535 votes in America that really make a difference, the votes in Congress.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
This is simply done to prevent tax avoidance.
Click to expand...


True but not the point. The point is that estate taxes are in fact a tax upon death, or in that tax avoidance area contemplation of death. So while I do not like the term death taxes, they are in estate taxes are in fact just that.

As you know the truly wealthy have many ways to escape this tax at least for some generations who understand the need and have the resources to set up trusts with the help of the best lawyers and accountants. People like Buffett, who wants others to be taxed more has set up trusts to insure that most of his wealth is NEVER taxed, either estate or personal income taxes. He also makes sure his shareholders do not get doubletaxed and thus pays no dividend.

So as usual the people who will get hit by this tax are people like farmers whose factory (their land) has appreciated greatly. I don't have the statistics but it is reasonable to assume that when high estate taxes are in place many family farms will have to be sold off.
 
washunut said:
True but not the point. The point is that estate taxes are in fact a tax upon death, or in that tax avoidance area contemplation of death. So while I do not like the term death taxes, they are in estate taxes are in fact just that.

As you know the truly wealthy have many ways to escape this tax at least for some generations who understand the need and have the resources to set up trusts with the help of the best lawyers and accountants. People like Buffett, who wants others to be taxed more has set up trusts to insure that most of his wealth is NEVER taxed, either estate or personal income taxes. He also makes sure his shareholders do not get doubletaxed and thus pays no dividend.

So as usual the people who will get hit by this tax are people like farmers whose factory (their land) has appreciated greatly. I don't have the statistics but it is reasonable to assume that when high estate taxes are in place many family farms will have to be sold off.
Click to expand...


Really?

In the 1990s, the Chicago office began a lucrative practice of offering tax shelter advice to a variety of wealthy corporate and individual clients, primarily by drafting opinion letters stating that certain tax schemes were compliant with the Internal Revenue Code. The Chicago tax group earned $267 million from 1998 to 2003. The group worked in coordination with tax advisers at Ernst & Young.
The Internal Revenue Service began investigating Ernst & Young and several taxpayers in 2002. Eventually, it audited many Jenkens clients, who subsequently filed malpractice suits against the firm. In 2003, the IRS itself sued Jenkens & Gilchrist. Facing a crushing potential liability, the firm began to unravel.[2]
As negotiations about settling with the government and other plaintiffs dragged on, partners with portable business began to depart. In 2005, the 90-attorney New York City office from legacy Parker Chapin defected to Troutman Sanders. In 2007, the Los Angeles office decamped to Baker & Hostetler. The remaining partners in the Chicago office switched to Nixon Peabody. Some 100 attorneys in Dallas, Austin and Houston found a new home at Hunton & Williams. The San Antonio office moved to Texas firm Winstead.
Finally, the firm agreed to settle its liabilities with the IRS, pay a $76 million fine, and to cease practicing law effective March 31, 2007.
On May 24, 2011, four lawyers with the firm were found guilty of tax evasion, conspiracy, and related charges stemming from a ten-year tax shelter scheme that prosecutors said generated more than $1 billion in fictive losses.[3] The defendants are currently seeking a new trial after learning one of the jurors lied about her background in order to be selected.[4]

Jenkens & Gilchrist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
TurtleDude said:
you are confused as usual. the top one percent are paying 40% of the taxes and the top 5% pay more of the fed taxes than the rest of the country combined. The dems want them to pay even more. the dems don't share tax collections with the majority, they use it to buy the votes of their pawns by increasing government
Click to expand...

I apologize for not realizing that you lived in an information vacuum. Obamacare, for example, is a program for a broad-based population of the Nation. Tax cuts for the wealthy would usually be self explanatory, but due to your vacuity, I shall explain. It is a break for the people with the money. Mostly inherited. Mostly Republicans with large smattering of genuine morons and trogolodytes. If these terms seem familial, don't be offended, certainly not your fault, don't you think?
 
DaveFagan said:
I apologize for not realizing that you lived in an information vacuum.

.....

It is a break for the people with the money. Mostly inherited. Mostly Republicans with large smattering of genuine morons and trogolodytes.
Click to expand...

Damn, another irony meter busted.
 
washunut said:
True but not the point. The point is that estate taxes are in fact a tax upon death, or in that tax avoidance area contemplation of death. So while I do not like the term death taxes, they are in estate taxes are in fact just that.

As you know the truly wealthy have many ways to escape this tax at least for some generations who understand the need and have the resources to set up trusts with the help of the best lawyers and accountants. People like Buffett, who wants others to be taxed more has set up trusts to insure that most of his wealth is NEVER taxed, either estate or personal income taxes. He also makes sure his shareholders do not get doubletaxed and thus pays no dividend.

So as usual the people who will get hit by this tax are people like farmers whose factory (their land) has appreciated greatly. I don't have the statistics but it is reasonable to assume that when high estate taxes are in place many family farms will have to be sold off.
Click to expand...

How many "family farms" are worth $10 million dollars? This is an argument that has been used against "death taxes" since the beginning of the debate and yet so far not one example of a forced farm sale has been found.
 
If the GOP continue to refuse to compromise on taxes, I say let all the tax cuts expire then come back and renew the middle class tax cuts and dare the GOP to vote against middle class tax cuts.
 
Somerville said:
How many "family farms" are worth $10 million dollars? This is an argument that has been used against "death taxes" since the beginning of the debate and yet so far not one example of a forced farm sale has been found.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that this would only affect the $10m "family farm" where the family did a very poor job of estate planning. Most people use insurance instruments to provide funds to transition the estate, including paying the taxes. The $10M "family farm" is a strawman with no real world application.
 
Catawba said:
If the GOP continue to refuse to compromise on taxes, I say let all the tax cuts expire then come back and renew the middle class tax cuts and dare the GOP to vote against middle class tax cuts.
Click to expand...

I think a deal will be made after the election, trading much of the Defense sequestration cuts for the tax breaks for the top bracket.

Republicans are between the rock of defense cuts that they view as unpalatable and the tax pledge hard place. There is no doubt that Democrats would agree to a tax increase to offset the defense sequester, but would oppose any other alternative except, perhaps, putting off the entire sequester, including domestic spending cuts, for a year. It’s doubtful that the GOP’s Tea Party wing would support that.

Republicans are not yet ready to embrace a tax increase even to prevent defense cuts. But it is clear that they are ultimately going to have to choose one or the other.
Click to expand...

Will Defense Cuts Kill the Anti-Tax Pledge?
 
iguanaman said:
I think a deal will be made after the election, trading much of the Defense sequestration cuts for the tax breaks for the top bracket.



Will Defense Cuts Kill the Anti-Tax Pledge?
Click to expand...


That may be so if the Democrats are still in the mood to continue to try to compromise with the party of no, as they have for the last 3 and 1/2 years. I wouldn't, but I realize I am more progressive than half the Democrats, including the president.
 
TurtleDude said:
you are confused as usual. the top one percent are paying 40% of the taxes and the top 5% pay more of the fed taxes than the rest of the country combined. [...]
Click to expand...
Ah ha! More right wing propaganda... man, ya gotta keep an eye on these folks. They get caught so often that you'd think they'd give up, but nooooo . . . . .

As the CBO chart shows below, the top 1% pay 22.3% of all federal tax liabilities (as of 2009, which I believe to be the latest figures available), not the 40% that the poster falsely claims. See the lower right figure with the yellow background. This includes all federal taxes, including FICA and the calculated individual share of corporate taxes.

By adding the two lower right hand figures together, the top 1% plus the 96th thru 99th % (blue background), we find that the top 5% pay 39.6% of all federal tax liabilities (red background), not in excess of 50% as the poster falsely claims.

This chart also lays to waste the right wing propaganda that some 47% pay no taxes at all. Even federal taxes (actually the right wants you to believe that they really pay no taxes... federal, state, local, nothing. and some do believe it).

None of this includes state and local taxes, which would probably make the poster's claims even further in error.


TaxPaidByQuintile.jpg


www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43373-Supplemental_Tables_Final.xls#2.%20Shares%20of%20Federal%20Tax%20Liabil!A1 (XLS spreadsheet) (pre-1990 data redacted to save space)
 
Karl said:
Ah ha! More right wing propaganda... man, ya gotta keep an eye on these folks.
Click to expand...

Wow you missed the whole point eh? Just look at the chart, look at the disbursment of who pays what percentage. The bulk weighs not on the shoulders of the middle class, as the left likes to proclaim.

You really should quit trying to read things into numbers that aren't there and just view the data.
 
Arbo said:
Wow you missed the whole point eh?
Click to expand...
No, I caught the lies quite well.

Arbo said:
Just look at the chart, look at the disbursment of who pays what percentage. The bulk weighs not on the shoulders of the middle class, as the left likes to proclaim.
Click to expand...
The nature of a progressive income tax means that the rich will pay more than the middle, while the bottom will pay just about none. That's the way the system is designed to work; that's the way it has worked since day one of the income tax. The question you should ask yourself is why is the right crying about it? Why are they using it for a basis of class warfare? Why are they exaggerating the effect in order to make people angry?

Arbo said:
You really should quit trying to read things into numbers that aren't there and just view the data.
Click to expand...
The right really should quit making numbers up; it makes fools of them and debases their arguments. Every time they lie, and they do it serially, they only alienate the intelligent independents and a certain segment of the intelligent conservatives. Obviously their arguments are tailored for the unintelligent, and obviously they figure there are enough of those to swing an election.

I would not bet that they are wrong.
 
Karl said:
No, I caught the lies quite well.

....

The question you should ask yourself is why is the right crying about it? Why are they using it for a basis of class warfare? Why are they exaggerating the effect in order to make people angry?
Click to expand...

Caught? Looks more like made up. But I realize that is hard for someone so far buried to notice in themselves.
 
Somerville said:
Which would you rather have as income - 60% of $1,000,000 or 97% of $20,000?
Click to expand...



that is not relevant

one someone has succeeded telling them they should be penalized and that is justified because they are still more successful than millions does not justify such parasitic behavior.
 
TurtleDude said:
that is not relevant

one someone has succeeded telling them they should be penalized and that is justified because they are still more successful than millions does not justify such parasitic behavior.
Click to expand...
Penalized? Bull****! :roll: You know full well you pass your taxes on to your clients just like any other business. Don't even bother to act like you actually suffer a loss.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Penalized? Bull****! :roll: You know full well you pass your taxes on to your clients just like any other business. Don't even bother to act like you actually suffer a loss.
Click to expand...

You don't really understand the source of all my income so you'd be better off not speculating. We need the government to take far far less from everyone and since the top 10% pay 70% of what is taken, that is where the diet needs to start
 
MoSurveyor said:
Penalized? Bull****! :roll: You know full well you pass your taxes on to your clients just like any other business. Don't even bother to act like you actually suffer a loss.
Click to expand...

It is illogical that you would support high taxes on the rich, since if you believe they 'pass on' the cost, that means whatever service or product they offer would cost more for the poor. Pretty much government just raising prices artificially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom