• 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!

Where do you land

Where do you land?

  • I am wealthy, and favor tax hikes for the wealthy

    Votes: 8 11.4%
  • I am not wealthy, and favor tax hikes for the wealthy

    Votes: 27 38.6%
  • I am wealthy, and against tax hikes for the wealthy

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I am not wealthy, and against tax hikes for the wealthy

    Votes: 23 32.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 12 17.1%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    70

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
So much talk about how the wealthy deserve this, and the rich need that. Where do you fall in all this?
 
So much talk about how the wealthy deserve this, and the rich need that. Where do you fall in all this?

What happens to the wealthy tax base when states implement a massive tax hike on the wealthy? It disappears. They move.
 
What happens to the wealthy tax base when states implement a massive tax hike on the wealthy? It disappears. They move.

Let 'em go. It's not like they're contributing. I refuse to respond to fear tactics.
 
I am dirt poor college student barely getting by on my research checks, scholarships, loans, and i am completely against tax hikes to the wealthy.
 
What happens to the wealthy tax base when states implement a massive tax hike on the wealthy? It disappears. They move.

Where do they move?

If federal income tax rates are increased are they going to move to Mexico?

And you say "massive tax hike" like everyone's talking about a massive tax hike or something. :2razz:
 
Last edited:
To be honest, without women most guys would be happy living in cardboard refrigerator boxes as long as we had a big screen with cable access to sports channels, war movies and good music; a refrigerator full of beer; and a big ass diesel powered pickup and bass boat parked right outside our cardboard boxes. And that's the honest truth. It is what it is.
 
Where do they move?

If federal income tax rates are increased are they going to move to Mexico?

And you say "massive tax hike" like everyone's talking about a massive tax hike or something. :2razz:

Namaste, Bardo.
 
this country doesn't need tax hikes levied against any economic class. what it needs is for government
to stop spending like a gold-digging whore using the sugar-daddy's platinum card.
 
And I had to vote other. I make what I need to have the life I like and save for retirement and I don't know anyone who likes their job more than I do.
 
Bill Clinton is right.

"At a White House news conference yesterday, Obama urged Republicans to set aside their rejection of tax increases as part of a deficit-reduction plan. Democrats are willing to accept some “painful cuts” to favored programs, and Republicans must concede that some taxes may have to be raised, he said."
 
And I had to vote other. I make what I need to have the life I like and save for retirement and I don't know anyone who likes their job more than I do.

That's lovely, but has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
 
I voted other.

I have been labeled socialist, liberal, among other things for my views on the super wealthy. My view is no person should ever accumulate more wealth then they can reasonably use in a lifetime. At this point I view it as greed plain and simple. You have no use to acquire more wealth yet continue to do so anyway.

One argument I continuously receive is "they should get what they earned", I disagree. When your wealth can no longer serve you in any reasonable manner and is taking away the potential of others this cannot be "earned or deserved". When one person has more wealth then entire countries this is going beyond reasonable in my opinion.

Now how to solve this? That is difficult. One can forcibly remove that wealth by taxes or other means or they can cap the amount any person can make. I prefer a cap. Redistributing wealth in my opinion often means giving it to those that simply will not do for themselves. This to me is as wrong as a person hording billions. I think with a wealth cap the ability to make the wealth is better evened out to those that strive for it. Take for example a CEO of a company that had 200 million in wealth. If he were not allowed to make any further money in his lifetime he would either step aside and allow someone else the opportunity or distribute the wealth he would have received to others. I think this would help "spread" the wealth in a more meaningful manner then tax + distribute.

While Im sure my idea has flaws and may not be the best approach I am always open to other solutions.
 

i actually clicked one of the polls linked within your leftist blog. this is what the poll said about americans and their opinions on taxes...........

14. Overall, what do you think is the best way to reduce the federal budget deficit - (by cutting federal spending), (by increasing taxes), or by a combination of both?

Cutting federal Increasing Combination No
spending taxes of both opinion
4/17/11 36 3 59 2
3/13/11 31 3 64 3
12/12/10 36 2 60 1

basically, what that says is that people are willing to sacrifice a bit more to reduce the
deficit, but only if government slashes it's spending. your blogger is a complete propagandist buffoon
attempting to spin the topic that americans are all for increased taxes unconditionally, when in fact
only 3% of those polled agreed with that notion.

this was the "poll" i clicked..................

Washington Post-ABC News Poll (washingtonpost.com)
 
Last edited:
Liberty, Equaluty, Fraternity

That said, the flat tax is the only thing that can qualify as "equality". Anything else is just jiberish. Imho. :)
Whether you are wealthy or poor, you have to pay your fair share. If you don't, you are subjected to persecution.
 
Liberty, Equaluty, Fraternity

That said, the flat tax is the only thing that can qualify as "equality". Anything else is just jiberish. Imho. :)
Whether you are wealthy or poor, you have to pay your fair share. If you don't, you are subjected to persecution.

i too agree with the "fair tax".....and i am not wealthy.
 
To Ayn Rand's fantasy island?


Or off to a country that allows them more freedom and ability to keep more of their money.

Oh right, this isn't happen so its clearly a fantasy.

Sometimes I wish I was blind as some people around here.
 
basically, what that says is that people are willing to sacrifice a bit more to reduce the
deficit, but only if government slashes it's spending. your blogger is a complete propagandist buffoon
attempting to spin the topic that americans are all for increased taxes unconditionally, when in fact
only 3% of those polled agreed with that notion.

Huh? I don't think anyone has proposed to reduce the deficit by raising taxes alone. Boop's claim was that most people support tax increases, not that they support tax increases to the exclusion of spending cuts. There's nothing spin-ish about what she said at all.
 
Huh? I don't think anyone has proposed to reduce the deficit by raising taxes alone. Boop's claim was that most people support tax increases, not that they support tax increases to the exclusion of spending cuts. There's nothing spin-ish about what she said at all.

But they never support tax increases for themselves. Isn't that just so cute? I think so.
 
But they never support tax increases for themselves. Isn't that just so cute? I think so.

I'll take a tax hike to help get this fixed. :shrug:

Where did you get this foolish notion?
 
I'm not wealthy. I am against tax hikes for the wealthy. Why should we forcibly restrict their financial freedoms to pay for a failing and foolish budget?
 
Back
Top Bottom