Obama's tax plan makes great sense.

Wants to change? Hold the man accountable for the what he says and does. He signed tax cuts including for the rich for two more years before the Republican congress even took the one House, the only part of the federal government they control.

The Democrats had control of the the House and Senate from 2006 to 2010. What exactly did they do about the tax rates during that time? If President Obama 'had no choice' but to do what the incoming Republican House members wanted, then why wasn't this so with President Bush and the incoming Democratic House leadership?

Let me guess what the next post will be, President Obama wants comprehensive immigration reform, even while having done nothing about it until it is time to make, fake and break a bunch of new campaign promises.

The man has a record now. Hold him to it.

Looks to me like everyone on the bottom 60% should be paying a little more and those in the top 10% should be paying a little less.

In reality though they just need to cut spending (a lot) and let everyone keep more of their own money. That's the best solution.

P.S. But why should the rich pay more? What is the reasoning and rationale behind it?

Because it's just so gosh darn unfair that they make more money and we want the guberment to stop 'em. Thar outta be a law against making money!

I agree with this post.

Yeah, those lazy motherfuckers in the bottom 10% should just tighten their belts and man up. Who cares if they have to live in their car for a while. Who cares i their kids have to go to school in shoes made out of cardboard. In fact they shouldn't even have the right to HAVE kids, those lazy lazy can't get off their backs (in more ways than one) lefties.

You are right the richest Americans are getting away with murder with these Bush Tax Cuts. They well can afford to pay more.

It's this that is the real pisser:

"Fourth 20%, $66,300, share 19.0%- paid 19.0%"
"Next 10%, $100,000, share 14.3%- paid 15.1%"
"Next 5%, $140,000, share 10.2%- paid 11.2%"

This, my friends, is what's fucking ridiculous.

You can't call them Bush tax cuts anymore. They were added for two more years by Pelosi, Reid and signed by Obama. If the rich are getting away with murder now, you have to point the finger at and demagogue the appropriate responsible persons.

If you don't want to have a calm and civilized discussion, just come right out and say it. Don't beat around the bush like this.

It's "fucking ridiculous?" Really? Seriously? Oh my God...you are serious.

I'm organizing a "fucking ridiculous" walk next week!

"Soak the rich" has been proven not to work time and again. Plus the best way to increase tax revenue is to get people back to work and get the economy going again.

But that's not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is to argue for taking money away from people that others think they shouldn't have because ... others have less.

To me that would violate the 4th. \

I'd support a flat tax with no deductions if it would fix that bullshit. Well... one deduction, a standard deduction that is the same amount for everyone.

Everyone in the nation pays 25% of their income less $25000 per year. I could handle that. Adjust the numbers as necessary to fit the budget.

No one wants to take more away from anyone because others have less. That's a lie and a straw-man of your own.

Some people do want to make corrections for a system that gives a disproportionate amount of financial power to those that have money compared to those that don't have money.

"Soak the rich" is a lie.

"Fund the government through proper taxation" has worked time and time again. But it depends on what you mean by the system "working". It may not "work" to enable the rich to get richer at quite as fast a pace. But it certainly works to make a greater majority of the people happier and healthier, which in the end gives them more freedom.

It doesn't work in that it doesn't make the rich pay more. What makes the rich pay more is to increase economic output. Duh.

tonton............


Our problem is not that we are not taxed enough. Our problem is that our government is out of control with scope and reach. We start too many wars, bail out too many banks, put too much pork into everything we do.

That is our problem. The lie is that if we just tinker our tax rates / code this way or that way we are smelling like roses.

We don't smell like roses no matter how we tax as the problem is on the other side of the ledger and in no small measure mind you. The unfunded liabilities are staggering and unsustainable.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Well I can't explain something I don't actually believe...but maybe you could explain how you derived what you just said from what I said.

Well taxation is theft period, and I would favor getting rid of the income tax entirely. Those issues aside and assuming neither is going to end, the the next best thing (after spending has been cut substantially) would be a single rate flat income tax with no deductions. Say something like 10%. You make $1M in wages...you pay $100K. You make $10K, you pay $1K. Like that.

How do you figure?

But I also said get rid of deductions. Simplify the code completely. This would, in many cases, balance things out. But make things much simpler. Taxes are not just about the rates.



Everyone would be paying less and keeping more of their income.

I'm pretty sure you don't understand how the deductions operate.



Well probably no welfare for sure. Public schools are primarily paid for out of property and state income taxes. But those aside I disagree with your dire evaluation. We would have all of the things that people want to pay for. We just might not have the things that those who can only achieve their goals by force want.

Whatever that means. You appear to be confused. You could reduce deductions and rates and the person could be paying the same amount. It just took less complexity to get to that point.

First, 10% might not be the right number.

Second, you can eliminate deductions and reduce rates at some rate and have these balance each other out.

Third, the rich in particular don't get all of their income from wages (that's partly why they're rich) so wage/income taxes hit them differently.

Fourth, spending cuts should be the first focus in order to get to lower taxes for everyone.

Let everyone keep more of their own money. Stop the redistribution.

Even if one believes the vast majority of people are stupid, greedy idiots, who need to be forced to do (or not do) certain things for their own good, I don't understand why one would believe the government (a group of people) is somehow immune to or above the stupidity, greed, and idiocy they see in the masses and should have authority over them.

I am of the opinion that the vast majority of people are inherently good, decent, and generous. We just want a good, safe life for our families and communities. Let the people keep more of their own money and do with it as they see fit, and I think we'd not only experience an economic recovery, but great prosperity.

You're right. We would see renewed economic growth, job and wealth creation. This would not be limited to one specific group of people either.

It makes no sense whatsoever. I think what you mean is that it looks good on the surface. In reality, it punishes small business and consumers while doing nothing to improve our fiscal situation. One could take 90% of the income in the top bracket and it would STILL not be enough to close our deficit for even one year.

What you fail to understand is that people with money are not going to sit back and just pay more in taxes. It doesn't matter what you do...it's not going to happen. Taxation affects behavior, which includes paying taxes, investing and consuming. In turn, this will hurt our currently anemic recovery.

As for your statement above (bold), that is simply not true. The top 5% of income earners pay nearly 59% of personal income taxes. The top 1% pay 38 percent. The top 25% pay a staggering 86 percent of total taxes. What you're referencing is non-earned income. You're talking about investment income, interest income, etc. The problem there is that the rich WILL find a way to minimize their tax burden. Doesn't everyone? Everyone tries to pay as little as possible. That's the way it should be.

One of the problems here, I suspect, is that you think one of the goals of taxation should be to redistribute wealth. You therefore want to take as much of other people's money as possible, so that it can be given to others by the government in some form. Again, this is what I suspect, but perhaps I'm incorrect.

If you really want to make taxes unavoidable, you should support either a flat tax or a sales tax in lieu of our current system. But you won't do that, because it will mean that those with less will actually pay something. Keep in mind, 47% of income earners actually pay nothing...they pay ZERO income taxes. Who do you think that groups consists of? Hint: It's not the rich.

Bleeding-heart liberalism. Tell a sob story while ignoring that the lower-middle class and poor pay almost nothing in taxes.

[QUOTE=Hands Sandon;1865182]The repubs wouldn't vote for tax cuts for 98% of Americans unless the richest 2% got the tax cut too. [/quote[

That's because they are the ones that pay the taxes.


Why?


How the hell will raising taxes "create jobs" and "prevent job losses?" And who are you to tell the rich what they should have? You realize that making $250,000 a year isn't exactly Ferrari or Rolls money nowadays, I assume.


I don't believe that either. This is illustrative of your view that taxes should redistribute wealth. By contrast, I believe that taxes should fund defense, law enforcement,government operations and necessary/desirable programs we as a society agree are needed. I don't believe people who earn more money should be punished for earning more money. It penalizes those who work for money. Consider for a moment that most people work until May of each year just to pay the government. Then tell me that taxes are too low for "the rich."