• 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!

No Fiscal Deal Without Higher Tax Rates On Rich, Obama Says

Grant said:
The very real problem is why so many Americans went along with it. Do they really and sincerely believe that taxing the rich will make a difference?
Click to expand...


Yes! $11.6 million dollars an hour difference, to be exact. That's enough to repay SS for the money borrowed from it and keep it solvent for 75 years!!!!
 
Catawba said:
Yes! $11.6 million dollars an hour difference, to be exact. That's enough to repay SS for the money borrowed from it and keep it solvent for 75 years!!!!
Click to expand...

To be exact?

Where does this figure originate and how does it fit in with the annual trillion dollar plus spending?
 
TaraAnne said:
Taxes are lower than they have ever been sorry that will not pass the sniff testb either.
Click to expand...

how is that relevant to the fact that the government spends way way too much

and the poor and middle class are paying less of the tax burden and less taxes than at any time in the last 60 years. Yet Obunny only thinks the top two percent should be forced to pay higher taxes to a wasteful government
 
minnie616 said:
But letting the Bush tax cuts expire is NOT raising taxes.
It is just allowing a temporary tax cut to expire.

When the Bush tax cuts were first passed they were temporay cuts and had a "sunset" attached to them.



read more:

How Will The Expiring Bush Tax Cuts Affect You? - Forbes.com
Click to expand...

you seem to forget Obunny wants to increase the tax burden only on the rich because he wants the indolent middle class and others who aren't paying for what they use to maintain those tax cut rates
 
Boo Radley said:
I invest in people daily. You?
Click to expand...

I do too-that's why I have been given numerous awards as a coach and teacher. that in addition to many other volunteer activities
 
minnie616 said:
Those Obamacare taxes are mostly pentalty taxes will will only effect a very small percentage of people who earn less $250,000.
Another fact you and Forbes seem to ignore is that the money saved by having health insurance will most likely save the tax payers more on health care than the penalty taxes they pay out.
Click to expand...

why does Obunny want to constantly jack up taxes on those of us who already pay a lion's share of the taxes? the Obama care imposes a 25% increase on investment taxes for those of us who are in the top 2%
 
TurtleDude said:
why does Obunny want to constantly jack up taxes on those of us who already pay a lion's share of the taxes?
Click to expand...

Because the President, like most of the rest of us, is smart enough to know that we have to reduce the deficit without cutting back on repayment of the funding we borrowed from SS. One of the best, and most fair ways to do that is to let the 4% tax cut for the wealthy expire. As determined by the CBO and our experience in the 90's show us, this will have little effect on the economy. Letting the tax cuts for the middle class expire on the other hand, is expected to throw us into another recession.

This is not a hard concept for most people.
 
Catawba said:
A figure of speech.

It originates from a report from the National Priorities Project.
Tax Cuts For Wealthy Americans Cost Treasury $11.6 Million Every Hour: Report

As noted in the thread above, it is but one of the measures that will be required to help reduce the deficit without cutting back on funds owed to SS.
Click to expand...

The Huff Post? With all the corrections on the bottom?

You should be very suspicious when anyone tries to tell you that taxes are calculated by the hour. That is not the way it works.

Also, tax cuts are not a cost.
 
Catawba said:
The majority of people already agree. That's enough!
Click to expand...

Where's that link?

A majority of people agreed with Lenin, too. Didn't make them right...did it?
 
Catawba said:
The majority of people already agree. That's enough!
Click to expand...

Yeah, and we have been thru this before. Which you were already shown about that majority and how it is actually viewed, and thru which means. Or did you forget that part already? I mean it was only 4 or 5 pages back.
rolleyes.png
 
apdst said:
Where's that link?

A majority of people agreed with Lenin, too. Didn't make them right...did it?
Click to expand...

Hitler and Mussolini had a lot of cred with the masses in their day too.

Perhaps some people just don't think through the consequences of their beliefs.
 
Grant said:
The Huff Post? With all the corrections on the bottom?

You should be very suspicious when anyone tries to tell you that taxes are calculated by the hour. That is not the way it works.

Also, tax cuts are not a cost.
Click to expand...



Its math, you should try it sometime!

Some history: The temporary tax cuts were given to the rich because the case was made they would create jobs. It was felt the loss in revenue from the tax cuts would be made up by increased jobs. That was the theory. What we found out was the rich took those tax cuts and moved American jobs overseas.

Therefore, there is no reason to continue the tax cuts for the rich, especially since that revenue is needed to repay SS for the money taken it so the rich could continue to enjoy their tax cuts.
 
TurtleDude said:
how is that relevant to the fact that the government spends way way too much

and the poor and middle class are paying less of the tax burden and less taxes than at any time in the last 60 years. Yet Obunny only thinks the top two percent should be forced to pay higher taxes to a wasteful government
Click to expand...

The problem there is taxes should have never been lowered in the first place. The Bush Tax cut is one of the biggest drivers of the national debt. They were a bad idea then bad idea now. Had those tax cuts not happened we would not be having this discussion at all. In my previous post I have clearly stated that all taxes should go up. You want to point out that the government spends to much yet over the last 10 years what party was largely in control of that spending it was not the Dems. That lays at the feet of Republicans and you can go back to the Reagan years for that. The debt problem was created by republican idealist that tried it and even now try to say it working lol.


More Evidence: Supply-Side, Trickle-Down Economics Doesn't Work | Decisions Based on Evidence

Please take a look at this link and it is pretty clear what Republicans pushed for it was not the middle class that caused the problems it was the rich welfare that caused the problems. The Republicans bought it hook line and sinker. To this day they are still trying pass this off as fact.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Where's that link?

A majority of people agreed with Lenin, too. Didn't make them right...did it?
Click to expand...

Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post

Republicans and Democrats have sharply different reactions to the government's taking such an active role in equalizing economic outcomes. Seven in 10 Democrats believe the government should levy taxes on the rich to redistribute wealth, while an equal proportion of Republicans believe it should not. The slight majority of independents oppose this policy.

Bottom Line

While a solid majority of Americans, 57%, believe money and wealth in the U.S. should be more evenly distributed among the people, fewer than half favor using the federal tax code to do so. The fault line in these views is distinctly partisan, with most Democrats championing redistribution and most Republicans opposing it......snip~


U would think they might have been able to figure out the majorities. Rather than just throw all into one lump sum and say the majority favors this or that. Again What don't they get that the majority doesn't favor using the Federal Tax Code to do it.
shrug.gif
 
Grant said:
Interesting.So if a majority of people believe something then it becomes true?
Click to expand...

Would you like me to provide you a link to learn how decisions are made in a democracy?
 
Catawba said:
Its math, you should try it sometime!

Some history: The temporary tax cuts were given to the rich because the case was made they would create jobs. It was felt the loss in revenue from the tax cuts would be made up by increased jobs. That was the theory. What we found out was the rich took those tax cuts and moved American jobs overseas.
Click to expand...

Is it your belief that some American companies moved their companies overseas because of tax cuts but will return when taxes go up again?
Therefore, there is no reason to continue the tax cuts for the rich, especially since that revenue is needed to repay SS for the money taken it so the rich could continue to enjoy their tax cuts.
Click to expand...

Well you are welcome to tax the rich 50, 70, or 100% of their incomes but they'll eventually escape to friendlier environments, just as they are doing now, and the government will have 100% of nothing. That's been a lesson throughout history.

That troubling question is often raised as to what happens when you run out of rich people. Do you have an answer for that?
 
Grant said:
Is it your belief that some American companies moved their companies overseas because of tax cuts but will return when taxes go up again?
Click to expand...

No, why do you just make up **** and it attribute it to me? What happened was the rich said they needed their taxes cut so they could create jobs for the peoples. But they didn't follow through on their end of the bargain. Since they could make their personal profits greater by moving US jobs overseas, they abandoned those who gave them tax cuts for jobs here.

So, there is simply no reason to continue to allow their tax cuts.


Well you are welcome to tax the rich 50, 70, or 100% of their incomes but they'll eventually escape to friendlier environments, just as they are doing now, and the government will have 100% of nothing. That's been a lesson throughout history. That troubling question is often raised as to what happens when you run out of rich people. Do you have an answer for that?
Click to expand...

We are only talking about 4% higher, just where they were in the 1990s. I was around then, and you know what? There was no exodus of the rich from this country in the 1990s!
 
TurtleDude said:
I do too-that's why I have been given numerous awards as a coach and teacher. that in addition to many other volunteer activities
Click to expand...

Sounds we're a lot alike. Only I seem happier. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom