A trillion in new taxes only on 'the wealthiest'?

you know what would be a good faith effort by the government to show the american people they are serious even if it would be nothing more thna symbolic...cut the duplicative agencies that do the same work as about 100 other groups. pick one and go with them. it's all smoke and mirros, i wish we could just go broke and start over.
 
This article does not even discuss Obama's elimination of charitable deductions and home interest deductions for the "rich". Don't tell me he hasn't raised taxes already.
 
Wait Wait
That headline must be wrong.
Obama said , " the LAST thing you want to do in a recession is raise taxes"

I feel sure he will remind us he said that during his morning press conference today
don't you?
 
i think most americans want to see those in Washington act like grown ups and make a deal in which both sides have to compromise.

We are Americans. We are all going to have to bite the bullet and sacrifice here. Some of our most needy are going to have to find ways to do with less. Some of our most wealthy are going to have to find ways to do with less, too.

I can't understand why both sides can't give up a little. The politics of it all depress me.

There was a pretty substanstive deal being worked on this past weekend between Boehner and Obama and the whole thing blew up (both tax inceases and spending cuts) -somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 trillion over 10 years.

I feel like the whole thing deal is going to be neutered down to 150 billion to 200 billion a year in just cuts, mostly due to lack of political courage on both sides. Big whoop.

the boilerplate op-ed posted above could have been written from a Dem point of view pretty easily by just substituting a few key mirrored partisan talking points. Each side doesn't want to give in, thinking the other side should make all the compromises.
 
Well we certainly don't want to punish success. As Jon Stewart aptly put it, let's puish age, illness and misfortune.
 
Johnny, I'm sorry but you could not be more wrong. This has nothing to do with financing the government in any way and it has everything to do with punishing achievement and scoring political points with your base.

Let me ask you, if raising taxes were actually a GOOD idea, why didn't the Democrats do it when they controlled everything?
 
Boehner needs to strengthen his backbone and not give one inch. Be the adult in the room and get some control of this spending insanity. The House of Representatives has the power. Start by defunding the illegal actions in Libya.
 
Remember, "At some point you've made enough money."?

Remember this exchange with Charlie Gibson when Obama said he would raise capital gains taxes? And Gibson pointed out LOWERING CG tax actually increased revenues?
"GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness."

Do I need to quote what Obama said the that plumber?

"
 
Hornsforever and Yoladu could not have illustrated my point any better. This entire argument is not based on funding the government at all, but rather about perceived fairness.

Those are fine points to make, but the bottom line issue is that the government is spending a great deal more than it is taking in, so spending needs to be reduced dramatically. Raising the debt ceiling without cutting spending is just insane. The problem will just keep repeating itself.
 
If we need to have a discussion about the fairness of the tax code, I'm all for it. I cannot understand GE's taxes at all.
 
Its interesting that these compassionate liberals such as Obama seem so fascinated in income taxes but never wealth taxes. Could it be that they are not so interested in going after their political benefactors but rather middle class folks who aspire to better themselves.
 
Here's your bottom line.....

The economy is headed into a 2nd dip and it will be a deep one. BO knows this and is looking build a narrative that it will be the Rs fault that the "fragile recovery he worked so hard to craft" was destroyed by the Rs not signing on to his tax increases.

Part of me says give the moron what he wants that way he owns it without question. He's effectively out of there in a little over a year anyhow and we can start to repair the damage.
 
The bottom line is that the current US federal government is too large and too expensive. We spend too much and have too much going on. There are programs that extend far beyond the enumerated powers granted the Federal government in the US Constitution.
If it isn't specifically authourised cut it. This should cut the expenditures of the federal government about in half. No need to raise the debt ceiling to continue spending money we don't have.
 
A recent example of gov't attempting to "tax the rich" was adding a 10% luxury tax to certain items over $100,000 back in the 1990's. This was a sure-fire way to raise revenue from the rich...right? WRONG! The rich aren't stupid, so they just quit buying yachts, etc. Before the tax could be repealed it had the effect of putting numerous boat companies out of business costing many low to middle income workers their jobs. And it never approached the tax revenue they projected.

When the rich, or even moderately well off, have money, they employ others. Why is that so hard to understand?
 
If you extend the time people can stay on unemployment, they will; and they have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top