• 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 propose $1.5 trillion in new tax revenue

teamosil said:
So we are just coming out of three decades of shoving insane amounts of our GDP into the pockets of the rich. It got so bad that it collapsed our economy, our education is falling behind the rest of the world, our standard of living is sliding, other countries are moving ahead of us in terms of median income, our median income actually fell over an entire decade for the first time since the great depression, the EU beats us for GDP and China likely will shortly too, a larger percentage of our population is without health care than any other first world country, etc. And your answer is to take even more money from the middle class and give it to the rich? Why would we continue to head down a bad path? If you were right in your theories, why is our economy not exploding right now? We're on the bleeding edge of a radical experiment in reaganomics. This is as far as any first world country has ever gone in this direction. And we're finding that is blows. When you try something and it fails miserably, you stop doing it.
Click to expand...

You really have been brainwashed and don't seem to understand actually earning your money. The best you can do is support a govt. that believes it should solve personal responsibility issues. "Your" President has a 39% JAR in some polls and the reason the economy ISN'T exploding right now is that "your" President, just like you don't understand how the economy works and what to do to motivate it? Why do you think anyone should send their money to you?
 
apdst said:
Aren't you the same guy that suggested we do away with all tax deductions and tax businesses on their gross revenue?





I gotta better idea. Why don't you post it for us, because I doubt Obama said anything like that, unless he was suggesting that businesses make less money which would be par for his dumbass.
Click to expand...

The budget would also extend a provision in the stimulus bill to allow small businesses to write off up to $250,000 of qualified investments, a measure that the administration says will slash small business taxes by $1 billion during 2009 and 2010.

Page 2: Obama's 2011 Budget Tax Proposals: President Obama Proposes Tax Cuts - ABC News

Tax breaks for small businesses played a prominent role in President Barack Obama’s $447 billion jobs plan, which he outlined tonight in a speech that called on Congress to “stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy.”

Read more: Obama Proposes 477 Billion Dollar Jobs Package - Business News - Portfolio.com


Obama Proposes Tax Credits to Spur Companies to Hire Jobless Vets


Read more: Obama Proposes Tax Credits To Spur Companies To Hire Jobless Vets | Fox News



FACT SHEET: President Obama Has Signed Eight Small Business Tax Cuts Into Law, Pledges to Sign Eight New Tax Cuts Benefitting Millions of Small Businesses | The White House
 
danarhea said:
When Eisenhower was president, the highest tax rate was 90%, and unemployment was low. No, I am not suggesting that we tax at 90% again. I just brought up this fact to show the lie that is being passed around that it is tax cuts that create jobs. Jobs are created when people buy stuff, and when the middle class is squeezed more than the rich, they buy less, and fewer jobs are created as a result. It's all about supply and demand. What can kill demand, and therefore jobs? Greed.
Click to expand...
Bingo! Your are the winner Dan. Those people who think they know all about capitalism and how it works don't know squat.
 
pbrauer said:
Bingo! Your are the winner Dan. Those people who think they know all about capitalism and how it works don't know squat.
Click to expand...

So what does allowing people more take home pay through tax cuts do if not give consumers more money to buy stuff? Tax hikes mean less money regardless of the tax bracket.
 
Conservative said:
Maybe if you would focus more on all the posts on this thread than just mine, you would be able to answer that question?
Click to expand...

You were replying to my post -- not all the posts in this thread. You asked how the rich getting richer can take money away from the non-rich and I gave you an example. Your reply was a non sequitur.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
You were replying to my post -- not all the posts in this thread. You asked how the rich getting richer can take money away from the non-rich and I gave you an example. Your reply was a non sequitor.
Click to expand...

My reply was to Winston, not you, I am still waiting for proof that the rich are getting richer off the backs of the poor and middle class. the rich take risks, have initiative, and drive that most poor and many in the middle class don't have.

I grew up striving to become one of those evil rich people thus having the ability to take care of my family. I never expected help from the taxpayers and have gotten nothing. I pay for the services I received by paying taxes and contributed to my SS retirement supplement over my 35 years in the business world. I expect to help take care of people in my community not yours and I expect a return on my investment in SS, not having that SS fund used to fund other govt. functions. I see no value in sending my money to D.C. so that a politician can take that money and spent it on social programs that don't benefit my community. I can do that myself locally without getting a middleman involved.
 
Smokified said:
Welfare, Medicare and Social Security are the 3 most expensive government programs.
Click to expand...

Whoa! No, that's not even close to true. Welfare is a program called TANF. It's annual budget is $16.6 billion. That is not even in the top 20 most expensive programs. Maybe not even in the top 100.

Smokified said:
If it is true that 1% of our population is on some kind of welfare yet that 1% accounts for 1 out of every 7 tax dollars, then there is serious problem here.
Click to expand...

1 out of 7 tax dollars? Welfare is 1 out of every 164 tax dollars spent.
 
Conservative said:
So what does allowing people more take home pay through tax cuts do if not give consumers more money to buy stuff? Tax hikes mean less money regardless of the tax bracket.
Click to expand...
5% of the population will not and simply cannot consume as much as the remaining 95%. So giving tax cuts to the 95% will have a much better impact on consumer demand.
 
Conservative said:
You really have been brainwashed and don't seem to understand actually earning your money. The best you can do is support a govt. that believes it should solve personal responsibility issues. "Your" President has a 39% JAR in some polls and the reason the economy ISN'T exploding right now is that "your" President, just like you don't understand how the economy works and what to do to motivate it? Why do you think anyone should send their money to you?
Click to expand...

So in your view, rich non-working people "earn" their money, but people who actually get their money by working do not? Both working people and investors are involved in generating most income. The question isn't one of taking what somebody earned and giving it to somebody who didn't or whatever, it is how to divide up the pie that we all create. You seem to think we ought to just let the rich decide how much they want to take and be thankful for whatever scraps are left for the rest of us. I don't think that at all.

Conservative said:
Good, now name for me any group of rich that control 5 trillion of that?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? That is the share of our GDP that the top 1% gets. Not sure what you mean.

Conservative said:
Isn't that what liberals are proposing, that my money be sent to D.C. so that politicians can send it to you?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you're following. Who gets what money is, always has been, and always will be, largely a product of a laundry list of rules our society sets up. Right now those rules are dialed all the way towards favoring the rich. Dialing them back to a bit more balanced solution isn't like more redistributive or something. Either way the rules are determining who gets money. Rules that favor the rich aren't somehow categorically different than rules that favor everybody else. It isn't like favoring one group is "keeping what you earn" and favoring a different group is "stealing" or whatever. Either way, the rules are deciding who gets money.
 
Tettsuo said:
5% of the population will not and simply cannot consume as much as the remaining 95%. So giving tax cuts to the 95% will have a much better impact on consumer demand.
Click to expand...

Then why aren't those 95% paying their "fair share?" all of them? 47% aren't paying any FIT thus apparently in your world their fair share is ZERO? Still waiting for your explanation as to why you believe it is my responsibility to fund your personal responsibility issues? I sure don't expect you to pay for mine but for some reason sending it to the govt. so they can send it to you is ok?
 
Conservative said:
Then why aren't those 95% paying their "fair share?" all of them? 47% aren't paying any FIT thus apparently in your world their fair share is ZERO?
Click to expand...

How many times do we need to go over this? Federal income taxes aren't the only taxes. Obviously you know that since we've been over it before, so what gives?
 
Conservative said:
Then why aren't those 95% paying their "fair share?" all of them? 47% aren't paying any FIT thus apparently in your world their fair share is ZERO? Still waiting for your explanation as to why you believe it is my responsibility to fund your personal responsibility issues? I sure don't expect you to pay for mine but for some reason sending it to the govt. so they can send it to you is ok?
Click to expand...
You asked a question and I answered. I'm not sure why you're making this personal. I don't have any responsibility issues, so I'm unsure why you're taking it there.

It's simple math Con. If you want to increase revenue but cause the least amount of pain from a tax hike, you hit up the rich.

So even if those 47% that you claim aren't paying FIT are forced to pay FIT, that would reduce their desire to consume and thus have a negative effect on the economy. Those 47% spend every penny they make while the top 5% have far more than enough and are more likely to save their excess.
 
danarhea said:
Apples and oranges. Demand creates jobs. When the middle and lower classes have no money, there is no demand. very simple.
Click to expand...

That was not the original question. Republicans originally claimed that tax cuts produced jobs. We had the tax cuts. Where are the jobs? Again, it was a BS question to begin with, since it is demand that creates jobs, and it has zilch to do with tax rates.
 
teamosil said:
How many times do we need to go over this? Federal income taxes aren't the only taxes. Obviously you know that since we've been over it before, so what gives?
Click to expand...

Federal income taxes are the only thing on the table. The Federal Govt. doesn't control state and local taxes but what the Federarl Govt. does is affect those tax revenues to the state. Anyone here believe that those evil rich people being forced to pay higher Federal Taxes won't be looking to offset those taxes by moving to a lower tax state? Doesn't bode well for you in California which is the biggest welfare state in the nation and a state with the highest number of minimum wage employees when considering the California minimum wage.

It doesn't look like you have ever looked at the budget of the United States. Suggest you go there and get the line items of both revenue and expenses. Let me help you, educate yourself.

U.S. Treasury

Current Report: Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government (Combined Statement): Publications & Guidance: Financial Management Service
 
Conservative said:
My reply was to Winston, not you, I am still waiting for proof that the rich are getting richer off the backs of the poor and middle class.
Click to expand...

Dude, it's not that hard.

A CEO of a big corporation tends to rake in a lot of money. But by no means is he (it's usually a "he"; would you like to suggest that women don't have the same drive as men do?) able to do so alone. To keep his offices clean, he has to hire janitors, and I wonder how much they make? In addition, he probably has a lot of workers for him, especially he runs a manufacturing or energy company. Unless they're unionized, they probably don't make a lot; and if the laborers are overseas, they may make pennies every hour. His office has to have running water; that water is provided by public servants who don't make near what he makes. To get to his office, he had to take a car, or taxi, or limo, or perhaps helicopter. That consumes gas, and remember what I said about laborers in energy companies? Furthermore, those roads had to be paved and occasionally repaved, and that takes labor. To even get where he is in the first place, he had to be taught in a classroom, and don't even get me started about how badly teachers are underpaid.

And that's just for him. That does not include the building of society off the back of laborers. Or the building of our economy, if we go far enough back, off the backs of people who were paid absolutely nothing. Or the development of European society, which was built on the back of practically the entire continent of Africa.

Conservative, you guys want to make it sound like that the rich just magically work their way up to the top, and nobody takes a hit for it on the way up. I really do not understand how you have deluded yourselves so, but I can tell you this: It's one of the greatest lies in our society today.
 
Phys251 said:
Dude, it's not that hard.

A CEO of a big corporation tends to rake in a lot of money. But by no means is he (it's usually a "he"; would you like to suggest that women don't have the same drive as men do?) able to do so alone. To keep his offices clean, he has to hire janitors, and I wonder how much they make? In addition, he probably has a lot of workers for him, especially he runs a manufacturing or energy company. Unless they're unionized, they probably don't make a lot; and if the laborers are overseas, they may make pennies every hour. His office has to have running water; that water is provided by public servants who don't make near what he makes. To get to his office, he had to take a car, or taxi, or limo, or perhaps helicopter. That consumes gas, and remember what I said about laborers in energy companies? Furthermore, those roads had to be paved and occasionally repaved, and that takes labor. To even get where he is in the first place, he had to be taught in a classroom, and don't even get me started about how badly teachers are underpaid.

And that's just for him. That does not include the building of society off the back of laborers. Or the building of our economy, if we go far enough back, off the backs of people who were paid absolutely nothing. Or the development of European society, which was built on the back of practically the entire continent of Africa.

Conservative, you guys want to make it sound like that the rich just magically work their way up to the top, and nobody takes a hit for it on the way up. I really do not understand how you have deluded yourselves so, but I can tell you this: It's one of the greatest lies in our society today.
Click to expand...

No more than you who wants everyone else to believe that there aren't dishonest people abusing the taxpayers. Pleae explain to me why we need a 3.7 trillion trillion dollar budget and how many of those getting taxpayer assistance are truly in need of that assistance and don't have the ability to earn it for themselves? The greatest lie in our society has always been "I am from the Federal Govt. and am here to help you!"

You want badly to believe what liberals tell you and even in the face of total failure you continue to buy the rhetoric. What is it about liberalism that creates such loyalty? What is the role of the Federal Govt. in your world?
 
Conservative said:
So what does allowing people more take home pay through tax cuts do if not give consumers more money to buy stuff? Tax hikes mean less money regardless of the tax bracket.
Click to expand...

That was not the original question. Republicans originally claimed that tax cuts produced jobs. We had the tax cuts. So where are all those jobs? Again, it was a BS question to begin with, since it is demand that creates jobs, and it has zilch to do with tax rates.
 
Conservative said:
Federal income taxes are the only thing on the table.
Click to expand...

More dishonesty. There are proposals concerning corporate taxes, and capital gains as well as depreciation, payroll taxes, etc

Try posting something that's true. You never know, it might work
 
Conservative said:
Federal income taxes are the only thing on the table.
Click to expand...

No it's not. There are tons of proposals floating around to increase the estate tax, corporate income tax, capital gains tax, etc. But that is besides the point. You claimed that 95% don't pay their fair share. Obviously to know what share they're paying and whether it is fair requires looking at all taxes, not just cherry picking one of them. I don't want to have to go over this with you again. It is dishonest to keep repeating the same line feigning ignorance after you've been called out on it. Cut it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom