Page 5 of 23 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 228

Thread: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Last Seen
    10-15-12 @ 02:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    523

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    His main goal is no different than any first term president. To get re elected. GHWB was the only one I have seen in my lifetime who didn't really care about that.
    That's a compliment to GHWB in my view.

    If he's doing this to get re-elected he's doing a fantastic job, a quarter of his party's base disapproves of him.

    If anything, this will hurt his chances severely.

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,905

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    The question was what is a fair rate for the Federal Govt. to tax the rich? I keep hearing liberals claiming that the rich need to pay their fair share and I rightly pointed out that 47% of the income earners in this country don't pay any FEDERAL INCOME TAXES so it does seem that you and others here have a problem understanding the difference between Federal and State tax rates and what they fund. I have no problem understanding the role of the Federal Govt. but it seems that isn't the case here for many. What is the fair FEDERAL tax rate for the rich?
    You are being intentionally obtuse. And there is a ideological purpose to your method.

    There is no 25 word or less snappy definition to what is fair in terms of taxation. It is a very complicated problem that no matter how carefully planned will always strike some persons as "unfair" depending on their personal situation. I suspect you already know that. And I suspect you realize that there is no such definition but you persist in pushing this because you feel there is some magic political gain to be made in this line of debate.

    Taxes are levied to fund the government. The level of taxation that is necessary is determined by the elected representatives of the people depending on the situation at the time. What is necessary in a time like 1943 is very different from what is necessary in a time like 1923.

    People are not equal. People do not earn equal amounts of money. People do not have the same equal amounts to pay. Our progressive tax system recognizes this fact.

    We have a wide variety of taxes that people pay. Just about everyone in our society pays some sort of tax somehow, someway at some time or another. Different taxes hit different people differently.

    It is fairly obvious that folks like you and others on the right here get very angry about 'ability to pay' and many of you feel that taking that concept into consideration for tax rates is itself 'not fair'...... whatever that phrase means to you. In my approach, to ignore ability to pay would be a ridiculous thing to do. The purpose of taxation is to raise money for the government. When you raise money, you go where the most money is available to be raised.

    You cannot get blood from a rock is a wise expression. And it applies to taxation also. Willie Sutton famously replied that he robbed banks because that is where the money was. And it to applies to taxation. To ignore both of those realities is to place yourself in an ideological straight jacket which makes for poor tax policy.
    Last edited by haymarket; 12-22-10 at 08:41 AM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  3. #43
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Hows that for a list of services provided by the federal government?

    For the states...well I'm not going to look up every single state so I'll just give you the state in which I reside....

    Idaho State Constitution
    and where does it say that the rich are actually getting any additional benefits? They don't

    the people who pay NO income tax actually get far more benefits FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT than those who pay 40% of the income tax and all the death tax



  4. #44
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You know turtledude...One day I hope to God that you loose all of your wealth. Not to be an ass or anything but to show you, teach you what it is actually like to be poor. Because you have NO CLUE what it is like or about.



    If you don't like it then move out of the country and renounce your citizenship. Because we're not the ones that are telling you that you have to abide by anything. There are only two things that do that. 1: You. 2: The Constitution of the United States of America. And number 2 isn't even binding for the simple fact that you can move out of the US and renounce citizenship.
    Loose all your wealth? your envy is pretty common among people like you. Thanks for proving my point as to what motivates the looter class. People who pay most of the taxes benefit people like you. Tax consumers like you don't benefit those of us who pay taxes



  5. #45
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    The same amount that they charge everyone else. I support the flat tax. Of course the rich would still complain that they were paying out more than anyone else. Which they would be...that's what happens when you base taxes on percentages rather than an exact dollar amount. But you can't really do dollar amounts either since spending is often a fluid system. Not to mention charging 30k per year from someone that is poor means that you're not going to get that 30k and likewise charging everyone 10 bucks a year is not going to get the bills payed.

    Point is that the rich in our society will always have to pay more to the government than the poor. Is it fair? Probably not. But just because they may pay more doesn't give them the right to rule over everyone else like turtledude wants.
    Of course the rich will always pay more because they make more. The flat tax means everyone pays the same rate but never the same amount. Not sure you understand the question. Throughout this thread the comments have been made about the rich paying their fair share and I simply asked what that fair share was and also asked if 47% not paying ANY FEDERAL INCOME Taxes was fair? Then I get the tax debate with claims that that 47% pay some taxes which was never the issue. The issue is FEDERAL INCOME TAXES!

  6. #46
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    You are being intentionally obtuse. And there is a ideological purpose to your method.

    There is no 25 word or less snappy definition to what is fair in terms of taxation. It is a very complicated problem that no matter how carefully planned will always strike some persons as "unfair" depending on their personal situation. I suspect you already know that. And I suspect you realize that there is no such definition but you persist in pushing this because you feel there is some magic political gain to be made in this line of debate.

    Taxes are levied to fund the government. The level of taxation that is necessary is determined by the elected representatives of the people depending on the situation at the time. What is necessary in a time like 1943 is very different from what is necessary in a time like 1923.

    People are not equal. People do not earn equal amounts of money. People do not have the same equal amounts to pay. Our progressive tax system recognizes this fact.

    We have a wide variety of taxes that people pay. Just about everyone in our society pays some sort of tax somehow, someway at some time or another. Different taxes hit different people differently.

    It is fairly obvious that folks like you and others on the right here get very angry about 'ability to pay' and many of you feel that taking that concept into consideration for tax rates is itself 'not fair'...... whatever that phrase means to you. In my approach, to ignore ability to pay would be a ridiculous thing to do. The purpose of taxation is to raise money for the government. When you raise money, you go where the most money is available to be raised.

    You cannot get blood from a rock is a wise expression. And it applies to taxation also. Willie Sutton famously replied that he robbed banks because that is where the money was. And it to applies to taxation. To ignore both of those realities is to place yourself in an ideological straight jacket which makes for poor tax policy.
    1) a consumption tax or a flat tax would make the more able pay more yet prevent the current pandering from taking place as well. That is what scares you the most-dem politicians would not be able to buy the votes of the net tax consumers by promising them that others will suffer tax hikes to pay for the goodies the net tax consumers want.

    2) the current system is poor policy because it almost demands that the NTCS demand more and more services in order to vote for those who promise them, while those who bear the brunt of paying the taxes cannot outvote the tax consumers. This system will collapse

    3) you support a political system that demands that tax burdens on the rich go up and up in order for your side to buy votes and then you demand that the rich should have to pay more and more. You put winning elections ahead of the good of the country-and no one can argue the country is better off creating more and more dependent tax consumers who demand more and more services and a tax system where less and less have to shoulder the burden



  7. #47
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Of course the rich will always pay more because they make more. The flat tax means everyone pays the same rate but never the same amount. Not sure you understand the question. Throughout this thread the comments have been made about the rich paying their fair share and I simply asked what that fair share was and also asked if 47% not paying ANY FEDERAL INCOME Taxes was fair? Then I get the tax debate with claims that that 47% pay some taxes which was never the issue. The issue is FEDERAL INCOME TAXES!
    Libs try to obfuscate the issue by talking about social security payments, etc. Those aren't the issues that are used to buy votes. and are not the "taxes" that fund most of the services that are used to buy the votes of the middle class and the poor.



  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,905

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    from Conservative

    The issue is FEDERAL INCOME TAXES!
    Actually the issue is taxation. Conservatives and right wingers simply want to narrow the field of discussion to ONLY income tax because right wing think tanks like Cato are pushing this new meme about the 47% in an attempt to both attack voting rights and alleviate the 'burden' of taxes on the wealthy. Never lose sight of what is really going on here. Lets not pretend this is something else other than a money and power grab.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  9. #49
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    You are being intentionally obtuse. And there is a ideological purpose to your method.

    There is no 25 word or less snappy definition to what is fair in terms of taxation. It is a very complicated problem that no matter how carefully planned will always strike some persons as "unfair" depending on their personal situation. I suspect you already know that. And I suspect you realize that there is no such definition but you persist in pushing this because you feel there is some magic political gain to be made in this line of debate.

    Taxes are levied to fund the government. The level of taxation that is necessary is determined by the elected representatives of the people depending on the situation at the time. What is necessary in a time like 1943 is very different from what is necessary in a time like 1923.

    People are not equal. People do not earn equal amounts of money. People do not have the same equal amounts to pay. Our progressive tax system recognizes this fact.

    We have a wide variety of taxes that people pay. Just about everyone in our society pays some sort of tax somehow, someway at some time or another. Different taxes hit different people differently.

    It is fairly obvious that folks like you and others on the right here get very angry about 'ability to pay' and many of you feel that taking that concept into consideration for tax rates is itself 'not fair'...... whatever that phrase means to you. In my approach, to ignore ability to pay would be a ridiculous thing to do. The purpose of taxation is to raise money for the government. When you raise money, you go where the most money is available to be raised.

    You cannot get blood from a rock is a wise expression. And it applies to taxation also. Willie Sutton famously replied that he robbed banks because that is where the money was. And it to applies to taxation. To ignore both of those realities is to place yourself in an ideological straight jacket which makes for poor tax policy.
    This is your response? You don't have a clue and continue to divert from the issue. The bill Obama signed was EXTENSION OF THE BUSH INCOME TAX RATES, rates applied to all individuals that make income in this country. It has nothing to do with other taxes that individuals pay but as usual you ignore the question, what is a fair rate for the rich to pay? Are you telling me that 47% of the people in this country cannot pay anything in FEDERAL INCOME TAXES? Keep running and dodging.

  10. #50
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,905

    Re: Obama Signs Bill To Extend Bush Tax Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    This is your response? You don't have a clue and continue to divert from the issue. The bill Obama signed was EXTENSION OF THE BUSH INCOME TAX RATES, rates applied to all individuals that make income in this country. It has nothing to do with other taxes that individuals pay but as usual you ignore the question, what is a fair rate for the rich to pay? Are you telling me that 47% of the people in this country cannot pay anything in FEDERAL INCOME TAXES? Keep running and dodging.
    You are simply following the marching orders of right wing think tanks like Cato and others who are attempting to frame the larger issue of taxation and public policy in its most narrow form possible because they believe they have a winning issue in that.

    Of course, as we found out right here on our little board when we polled the issue, there is no real support for linking income tax rates to the larger issue of citizenship rights. It fails miserably.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

Page 5 of 23 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •