View Poll Results: Should the 2001/2003 GWB tax cuts be extended for people that make under $250k?

Voters
63. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, because...

    35 55.56%
  • No, because...

    24 38.10%
  • um... wait...

    4 6.35%
Page 24 of 33 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 321

Thread: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

  1. #231
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,545

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I believe in the root form of the term, conserve. To conserve our resources, including our environment. What I find ironic is that most other "conservatives" I've met don't believe in conserving. .
    My bs detector redlined. You are essentially a statist



    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Our most prosperous time in this country was when the progressive tax system was still progressive, that's why they called it the Golden Era. Reagan and W put an end to that, which started our big climb into debt and the gradual destruction of the middle class, which brings us to where we are today. A course correction is needed to get us back on track.


    More BS-the most prosperous time was before the income confiscation tax escalated and you cannot prove a cause and effect

    education is the issue, not soaking the hard working to make the untalented feel better. dem entitlement programs have created legions of addicts who have no incentive to work hard and be in the middle or upper middle class



  2. #232
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I I support medicare for people over 65 who pay for it.......
    No you don't. You are on record supporting Medicare proper and Medicare Part D, which are entitlement programs for EVERYONE over 65. Want me to dig up the quote, or will you just admit that you're lying now?

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride
    2 That is welfare....Pay for you own schooling.get a job.......
    And yet it never even OCCURS to you to get a job to pay for your own retirement and health care.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride
    3 You have entitlement programs...... people pay for them.......
    The difference is that I don't have a problem with those entitlement programs. Sure, some of them need to be reformed, but I'm not the one who constantly bitches about "failed welfare programs" while simultaneously living off them. Hypocrite.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #233
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Per The Omaba's FY2011 budget proposal:


    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...s/receipts.pdf

    Should the 2001/2003 GWB tax cuts be extended for people that make under $250k?
    Why or why not?
    Yes but only until the economy starts to recover, then they need to repeal them.

    They also need to raise the taxes on 401k distributions.
    Last edited by Harry Guerrilla; 02-13-10 at 03:03 PM.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  4. #234
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    My bs detector redlined. You are essentially a statist
    I am a conservationist.

    More BS-the most prosperous time was before the income confiscation tax escalated and you cannot prove a cause and effect
    I can prove that from 1950 until Reagan, our debt did not increase as a percentage of the GDP., despite the high taxes for the top income bracket. So there is no evidence the progressive tax rates hindered our economy.

    education is the issue, not soaking the hard working to make the untalented feel better. dem entitlement programs have created legions of addicts who have no incentive to work hard and be in the middle or upper middle class
    I agree education is paramount, which is why I am proud Obama made the biggest increase in funding for education in modern history. The changes needed to return our tax system to a progressive one, as our forefathers wisely set up a century ago, have nothing to do with feelings. It is needed to decrease the wealth gap between the middle class and the upper class that began with Reagan's drastic tax cuts to the upper income brackets, so that the middle class again has the purchasing power needed to make our economy work as it did from 1950 until the dismantling of our progressive tax system under Reagan and W.
    Last edited by Catawba; 02-13-10 at 03:31 PM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #235
    Professor

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

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    I would say do not extend anything but the capital gains tax cuts.

  6. #236
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post

    this is idiotic

    everyone should be able to keep the same percentage of the next dollar they earn. Your system is a major reason why we have a runaway debt--right now the dems win elections by promising the majority of voters that they can continue to have all their pork and it will be paid for by jacking up the taxes on the minority of voters who pay most of the taxes. The top 1% make 22% of the income but pay 40% of the income taxes and almost all the death confiscation taxes

    we should have a system where YOU suffer MORE taxes at the same percentage as I do when there are tax increases.

    Like most class warfare jihadists, you fail to understand that if taxes are jacked up on the smartest and most productive people, they engage in tax avoidance strategies that DECREASE the taxes they pay costing parasites big time. Remember the Moronic Clinton LUXURY TAX--who did it hurt? not the rich buying yachts--it hurt the blue collar people who built yachts
    You may THINK it's unfair because of Your political stance, which has NO basis in the econonic history of this country... only in what you naively perceive as 'fair'.
    So easy on the "Idiotic" unless you have a Mirror handy.

    We have a Progressive income tax now, which in your mind is already 'unfair'.
    but in FACT, it's clearly not Progressive Enough to prevent greater and greater income disparity and so-called 'working poor.

    So that IN FACT, BOTH parties have agreed several times to stimulous checks (ie 600/1200) which benefit the little guy (and effectivley Lower His tax rate far more significantly than bigger earners) and who HAS to spend every penny he makes ALREADY and still has nothing left.
    He can't buy enough cars, computers, etc, to support the Stock prices of the rich. So ALL then do agree where relief is more needed.
    The Closet 'Proof of the Pudding'.

    A Flat Rate Income tax would obviously cause even greater disparity and Raise the taxes of at least the bottom 2/3s (probably 4/5's/80%) of the population now to lower the taxes on the richer.
    Of course, Only AN "IDIOT" would propose it, and no one really has seriously tried.

    And as to "Class Warfare", I already addressed this, the most myopic of your many Goofy remarks in post #176.

    Quote Originally Posted by me post #176

    [........]

    Top Marginal rates are historically near the Bottom. They were 50%-90% when we were a "Communist" country (and had less income disparity) in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and early 80's.
    But most posters being young (not to mention hoodwinked).. simply don't remember.

    Any attempt to return to Historic NORMS, much less eliminate the extra Bush Pig-fest/Cap Gains/Divs/Estate tax cuts, is "Class warfare".

    Just ask Hannity.
    Class warfare, as Buffett has said, His side has already won.

    -
    Perspective

    Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003 (TruthAndPolitics.org)

    Historical rates (married couples, filing jointly)
    Table

    Year/ Top Rate%/ Over

    1913 --- 7% 500,000
    1914 --- 7% 500,000
    1915 --- 7% 500,000
    1916 --- 15% 2,000,000
    1917 --- 67% 2,000,000
    1918 --- 77% 1,000,000
    1919 --- 73% 1,000,000
    1920 --- 73% 1,000,000
    1921 --- 73% 1,000,000
    1922 --- 58% 200,000
    1923 --- 43.5% 200,000
    1924 --- 46% 500,000
    1925 --- 25% 100,000
    1926 --- 25% 100,000
    1927 --- 25% 100,000
    1928 --- 25% 100,000
    1929 --- 24% 100,000
    1930 --- 25% 100,000
    1931 --- 25% 100,000
    1932 --- 63% 1,000,000
    1933 --- 63% 1,000,000
    1934 --- 63% 1,000,000
    1935 --- 63% 1,000,000
    1936 --- 79% 5,000,000
    1937 --- 79% 5,000,000
    1938 --- 79% 5,000,000
    1939 --- 79% 5,000,000
    1940 --- 81% 5,000,000
    1941 --- 81% 5,000,000
    1942 --- 88% 200,000
    1943 --- 88% 200,000
    1944--- 94 200,000
    1945 --- 94% 200,000
    1946 --- 86% 200,000
    1947 --- 86% 200,000
    1948 --- 82.% 400,000
    1949 --- 82% 400,000
    1950 --- 84.36% 400,000
    1951 --- 91% 400,000
    1952 --- 92% 400,000
    1953 --- 92% 400,000
    1954 --- 91% 400,000
    1955 --- 91% 400,000
    1956 --- 91% 400,000
    1957 --- 91% 400,000
    1958 --- 91% 400,000
    1959 --- 91% 400,000
    1960 --- 91% 400,000
    1961 --- 91% 400,000
    1962 --- 91% 400,000
    1963 --- 91% 400,000
    1964 --- 77% 400,000
    1965 --- 70% 200,000
    1966 --- 70% 200,000
    1967 --- 70% 200,000
    1968 --- 75.25% 200,000
    1969 --- 77% 200,000
    1970 --- 71.75% 200,000
    1971 --- 70% 60% 200,000
    1972 --- 70% 50 200,000
    1973 --- 70% 50 200,000
    1974 --- 70% 50 200,000
    1975 ----70% 50 200,000
    1976 --- 70% 50 200,000
    1977 --- 70% 50 203,200
    1978 --- 70% 50 203,200
    1979 --- 70% 50 215,400
    1980 --- 70% 50 215,400
    1981 --- 69% 50 215,400
    1982 --- 50% 85,600
    1983 --- 50% 109,400
    1984 --- 50% 162,400
    1985 --- 50 % 169,020
    1986 --- 50 % 175,250

    1987 --- 38.5% 90,000
    1988 --- 28% <8> 29,750 <8>
    1989 --- 28% <8> 30,950 <8>
    1990 --- 28% <8> 32,450 <8>
    1991 --- 31% 82,150
    1992 --- 31% 86,500
    1993 --- 39.6% 89,150
    1994 --- 39.6% 250,000
    1995 --- 39.6% 256,500
    1996 --- 39.6% 263,750
    1997 --- 39.6% 271,050
    1998 --- 39.6% 278,450
    1999 --- 39.6% 283,150
    2000 --- 39.6% 288,350
    2001 --- 39.1% 297,350
    2002 --- 38.6% 307,050
    2003 --- 35% 311,950
    Last edited by mbig; 02-13-10 at 04:37 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  7. #237
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,545

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I am a conservationist.



    I can prove that from 1950 until Reagan, our debt did not increase as a percentage of the GDP., despite the high taxes for the top income bracket. So there is no evidence the progressive tax rates hindered our economy.



    I agree education is paramount, which is why I am proud Obama made the biggest increase in funding for education in modern history. The changes needed to return our tax system to a progressive one, as our forefathers wisely set up a century ago, have nothing to do with feelings. It is needed to decrease the wealth gap between the middle class and the upper class that began with Reagan's drastic tax cuts to the upper income brackets, so that the middle class again has the purchasing power needed to make our economy work as it did from 1950 until the dismantling of our progressive tax system under Reagan and W.
    socialists go through such great contortions justify confiscating wealth from others.

    want the gap to decrease? tell those at the bottom to stop engaging in destructive pathologies



  8. #238
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,545

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    You may THINK it's unfair because of Your political stance, which has NO basis in the econonic history of this country... only in what you naively perceive as 'fair'.
    So easy on the "Idiotic" unless you have a Mirror handy.

    We have a Progressive income tax now, which in your mind is already 'unfair'.
    but in FACT, it's clearly not Progressive Enough to prevent greater and greater income disparity and so-called 'working poor.

    So that IN FACT, BOTH parties have agreed several times to stimulous checks (ie 600/1200) which benefit the little guy (and effectivley Lower His tax rate far more significantly than bigger earners) and who HAS to spend every penny he makes ALREADY and still has nothing left.
    He can't buy enough cars, computers, etc, to support the Stock prices of the rich. So ALL then do agree where relief is more needed.
    The Closet 'Proof of the Pudding'.

    A Flat Rate Income tax would obviously cause even greater disparity and Raise the taxes of at least the bottom 2/3s (probably 4/5's/80%) of the population now to lower the taxes on the richer.
    Of course, Only AN "IDIOT" would propose it, and no one really has seriously tried.

    And as to "Class Warfare", I already addressed this, the most myopic of your many Goofy remarks in post #176.



    Perspective


    winners win, losers lose
    this country wasn't set up to comfort losers or to increase their numbers

    your existence does not justify others having to pay for you to live



  9. #239
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    socialists go through such great contortions justify confiscating wealth from others.
    Yeah, those dang ole socialist forefathers! LOL!
    Last edited by Catawba; 02-13-10 at 06:55 PM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #240
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,545

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    the concept of social engineering is contrary to our constitution and the income tax was not set up to do what you want and would have never passed if it was billed as the great equalizer as you say it is. We need to scrap the death tax now that we have confiscatory progressive income taxes

    the main reason to scrap progressive taxes is that they allow the dems to buy the votes of people like you by promising tax hikes will only be applied to others

    with such a system the parasite class will continue to vote into power income redistributionists who will ultimately force the prosperous to leave the nation meaning the parasites' standards of living will go downhill



Page 24 of 33 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... 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
  •