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 32 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2230313233 LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 321

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

  1. #311
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    181,687

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

    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post
    I agree with you that some taxation like that should be avoided, which is why I support Clinton's tax rate. If Obama wants to go above what there was under Clinton, then I would oppose that.


    Yeah you are right, Hoover increased income taxes to 63% on top earners, and it only reached 90% during WWII. FDR first raised taxes in 1933 to 73%, but the largest increase was during WWII.

    Either way, Hoover increased it drastically.

    The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2010
    Hoover was a failure-jacking up taxes was a major mistake. Yes he was GOP, but he still was awful



  2. #312
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    181,687

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I don't know what you mean there. Clarify please.



    No it was skewed the most when tax rates were 92% for the the top tax bracket. We are but a fraction of that now.



    Perhaps it would be cheaper to build poor houses, or increase welfare? How do you get blood out of a turnip?



    I think being poor, is suffering enough! If you wish to trade places with the poor, I am sure you will find takers!
    the rate of progresstivity is at its highest since less people are paying income taxes now in terms of percentages.

    I oppose policies that are designed to keep people poor or expand the amount of people dependent on the government. current dem policies do that IMHO



  3. #313
    Pathetic Douchebag
    Cilogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    10-10-14 @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,587

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I oppose policies that are designed to keep people poor or expand the amount of people dependent on the government.
    That ... is like the definition of American capitalism.


  4. #314
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cilogy View Post
    That ... is like the definition of American capitalism.
    its an interesting thing about progressive taxation... even though i support them because it gives more income to poorer individuals, it also gives a dis-sentive for someone to increase their income because their tax rate will increase the more they make.

    I care less about the disincentive for the rich because they are already rich :P


    Regressive taxation sucks, but it gives an incentive for people to increase their income to pay at a lower tax rate

  5. #315
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    181,687

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cilogy View Post
    That ... is like the definition of American capitalism.
    wrong

    but you knew that



  6. #316
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    181,687

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

    Quote Originally Posted by nerv14 View Post
    its an interesting thing about progressive taxation... even though i support them because it gives more income to poorer individuals, it also gives a dis-sentive for someone to increase their income because their tax rate will increase the more they make.

    I care less about the disincentive for the rich because they are already rich :P


    Regressive taxation sucks, but it gives an incentive for people to increase their income to pay at a lower tax rate
    how does progressive income tax give the poor more income

    just curious. through income redistribution which is not necessarily a component for Prog income taxes or by lessening their tax burden?

    the other point is interesting

    my main reason for opposing progressive rates is to prevent the vote buying and the power it gives congress.



  7. #317
    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
    the rate of progresstivity is at its highest since less people are paying income taxes now in terms of percentages.
    Progressive taxes are designed to be proportional to wealth, to prevent the regressive situation we are in today where 20% of the population owns 80% of the wealth.
    I oppose policies that are designed to keep people poor or expand the amount of people dependent on the government. current dem policies do that IMHO
    Than your position is counter productive to your goal, because the more wealth you take from people, the more you make them dependent on the government.

    It was why the progressive tax was created in the first place and why we have a middle class now which is slowly deteriorating due to the shift in tax burden away from the wealthy onto the middle class.
    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

  8. #318
    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 main reason for opposing progressive rates is to prevent the vote buying and the power it gives congress.
    As if the people with the most money, especially now with the new supreme court ruling, don't have the most influence on legislation?
    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

  9. #319
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    how does progressive income tax give the poor more income

    just curious. through income redistribution which is not necessarily a component for Prog income taxes or by lessening their tax burden?

    the other point is interesting

    my main reason for opposing progressive rates is to prevent the vote buying and the power it gives congress.
    It is pretty simple, but if someone agrees with it is another issue.

    If the poor pay less taxes then the rich for a given amount of government spending, then the poor are getting to keep more income then during a flat tax system with the same government expenditure.

  10. #320
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Progressive taxes are designed to be proportional to wealth, to prevent the regressive situation we are in today where 20% of the population owns 80% of the wealth.


    Than your position is counter productive to your goal, because the more wealth you take from people, the more you make them dependent on the government.

    It was why the progressive tax was created in the first place and why we have a middle class now which is slowly deteriorating due to the shift in tax burden away from the wealthy onto the middle class.
    I don't see how you can make the claim that progressive taxation has to be proportional to wealth... or else it isn't progressive.

    If anything, progressive taxation should relate to the rich paying more for each dollar devoted to increasing their standard of living, and not the rich owning more wealth.

    I think that people get most of their standard of living from spending, and not from having already bought items (such as houses). So in that case, the system today is still progressive.

    but wealth should still play a part in how progressive a tax system is interpreted as being though.

Page 32 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2230313233 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
  •