Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on September 20, 2011, 06:26:46 AM
-
Another example of a person who everyone knows is a brilliant businessman - but suddenly he'll be called a dumbass for agreeing with obama
Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, said wealthy Americans should pay "lots of taxes" in a post on his blog on Monday.
Titled "The Most Patriotic Thing You Can Do," the post told readers that wealthy Americans should "do something positive" with their money by hiring, training and paying employees and spending money on rent, equipment and services.
"I don’t care what anyone says. Being rich is a good thing," Cuban wrote. "Not just in the obvious sense of benefiting you and your family, but in the broader sense. Profits are not a zero sum game. The more you make the more of a financial impact you can have."
-
With a name like that, "Cuban", I knew he was just an evil commie. >:(
;D
-
240 - does a single filer making 200k in NYC, paying off school loans, qualify as wealthy?
-
Well, then tax him a lot more on his income AND INVESTMENTS. It won't be long before that pig starts squealing.
-
Well, the tax him a lot more on his income AND INVESTMENTS. It won't be long before that pig starts squealing.
Its always funny how billionaires make these pronouncements when the actual bills apply to people making 250k a year, which in NYC and other places - is middle class at best.
-
I like the million dollar cutoff, not 250.
-
I like the million dollar cutoff, not 250.
Guess why they have not increased the tax to that threshhold?
-
240 - does a single filer making 200k in NYC, paying off school loans, qualify as wealthy?
Yup, that's the point. When you have millions or billions, the extra tax isn't felt. But, in the example you provide, it can be the difference between saving something, and saving nothing every year.
-
Yup, that's the point. When you have millions or billions, the extra tax isn't felt. But, in the example you provide, it can be the difference between saving something, and saving nothing every year.
This is why Obama the lying sack of Kenyan shit is almost universally mocked, laughed at, hated, and no longer paid attention to in any of this other than for entertainment.
Everyone knows Obama is a lying piece of garbage other than his deluded cult following who grows smaller and smaller.
-
Guess why they have not increased the tax to that threshhold?
why? cause 250-999k = majority are repub voters anyway?
-
deluded cult following who grows smaller and smaller.
Mods, please move this post to the tea party 2011 thread.
-
why? cause 250-999k = majority are repub voters anyway?
no - because if they raise the threshhol to $1 mill and up - they will gain little or no real tax receipets.
-
I read that bog post. Great words.
-
Who cares what he thinks? He should go ahead and donate as much as he wants to the IRS, and then shut the heck up.
-
Another example of a person who everyone knows is a brilliant businessman - but suddenly he'll be called a dumbass for agreeing with obama
Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, said wealthy Americans should pay "lots of taxes" in a post on his blog on Monday.
Titled "The Most Patriotic Thing You Can Do," the post told readers that wealthy Americans should "do something positive" with their money by hiring, training and paying employees and spending money on rent, equipment and services.
"I don’t care what anyone says. Being rich is a good thing," Cuban wrote. "Not just in the obvious sense of benefiting you and your family, but in the broader sense. Profits are not a zero sum game. The more you make the more of a financial impact you can have."
240. do you think the wealthy do not pay " lots of taxes"?
-
I'm sorry but for the liberal posters on this board you are being made to look like idiots for believing that the middle class and poor pay more taxes than the rich. I know some ignorant have been writing articles that say they do but they are WRONG. there's really no other way to say it. and you guys are eating it up. and thats all they need. some of you will be set straight but a lot of you will perpetuate this lie right into the voting booth next year. WAKE UP!
-
Who cares what he thinks? He should go ahead and donate as much as he wants to the IRS, and then shut the heck up.
Repubs love to give that response when some wealthy person makes the statement that wealthy people should be taxed more..... i.e if they believe it then they should voluntarily give more money to the IRS but not try to impose their belief on others.
funny how Repubs reject that type of argument when it comes to abortion or drugs.
you know, if you're against abortions or drugs then don't get an abortion or use drugs
the point is that Buffet, Cuban, are saying the the tax code is unfairly skewed to the advantage of wealthy people (not necessary high income "wage earners") and them simply making a donation to the IRS does not address the problem
-
Repubs love to give that response when some wealthy person makes the statement that wealthy people should be taxed more..... i.e if they believe it then they should voluntarily give more money to the IRS but not try to impose their belief on others.
funny how Repubs reject that type of argument when it comes to abortion or drugs.
you know, if you're against abortions or drugs then don't get an abortion or use drugs
the point is that Buffet, Cuban, are saying the the tax code is unfairly skewed to the advantage of wealthy people (not necessary high income "wage earners") and them simply making a donation to the IRS does not address the problem
and their point is completely wrong. THE TAX CODE IS NOT UNFAIRLY SKEWED TO THE ADVANTAGE OF THE WEALTHY. and unfortunately you believe them. why do you believe them? the statistics are plain as day. and people like yourself simply refuse to accept the truth. the funny thing is all they have to do is say it. and you are going to walk into a voting booth next year believing that the poor and middle class pay more taxes than the rich.
-
The truly fair tax is a national sales tax with exemption for food and medical, nothing else.
-
Repubs love to give that response when some wealthy person makes the statement that wealthy people should be taxed more..... i.e if they believe it then they should voluntarily give more money to the IRS but not try to impose their belief on others.
funny how Repubs reject that type of argument when it comes to abortion or drugs.
you know, if you're against abortions or drugs then don't get an abortion or use drugs
the point is that Buffet, Cuban, are saying the the tax code is unfairly skewed to the advantage of wealthy people (not necessary high income "wage earners") and them simply making a donation to the IRS does not address the problem
and putting an even larger burden on the rich to earn more tax revenue is not going to address the problem either. The tax rate does not exist that will make up for the amount that we are spending. It's the equivalent of the Hoover damn bursting and bringing 100 rolls of paper towels to help out.
-
and putting an even larger burden on the rich to earn more tax revenue is not going to address the problem either. The tax rate does not exist that will make up for the amount that we are spending. It's the equivalent of the Hoover damn bursting and bringing 100 rolls of paper towels to help out.
the only "problem" it addresses is the inequity in the tax system.
It certainly won't (by itself) fix the deficit or pay down the debt but it's part of the equation
The Repubs won't even acknowledge that this IS part of the equation
I'm for a balanced approach that includes both revenue and spending
-
the only "problem" it addresses is the inequity in the tax system.
It certainly won't (by itself) fix the deficit or pay down the debt but it's part of the equation
The Repubs won't even acknowledge that this IS part of the equation
I'm for a balanced approach that includes both revenue and spending
does everybody see what i'm talking about here? Straw man thinks that our tax system is not a progressive tax system and that it is skewed towards favoring the rich. HE IS WRONG. Period. But all they have to do is say it. And straw man will walk into the voting booth thinking that we do not have a progressive tax system in the US. I'll say it again even though it won't do any good. The top 10% of tax returns pay almost 60% of our tax bill. That is a progressive tax system. There is no way around it. Are there some tax advantages that are extended to the rich? Yes there are. Does that mean that our entire tax sysytem is inequitable? No. These authors are taking factoids and turning them into something they're not. And Straw Man is eating it up.
-
does everybody see what i'm talking about here? Straw man thinks that our tax system is not a progressive tax system and that it is skewed towards favoring the rich. HE IS WRONG. Period. But all they have to do is say it. And straw man will walk into the voting booth thinking that we do not have a progressive tax system in the US. I'll say it again even though it won't do any good. The top 10% of tax returns pay almost 60% of our tax bill. That is a progressive tax system. There is no way around it. Are there some tax advantages that are extended to the rich? Yes there are. Does that mean that our entire tax sysytem is inequitable? No. These authors are taking factoids and turning them into something they're not. And Straw Man is eating it up.
i have been arguion w straw for years now. Nothing wil get throuygh to him.
-
They already do. :-\
-
does everybody see what i'm talking about here? Straw man thinks that our tax system is not a progressive tax system and that it is skewed towards favoring the rich. HE IS WRONG. Period. But all they have to do is say it. And straw man will walk into the voting booth thinking that we do not have a progressive tax system in the US. I'll say it again even though it won't do any good. The top 10% of tax returns pay almost 60% of our tax bill. That is a progressive tax system. There is no way around it. Are there some tax advantages that are extended to the rich? Yes there are. Does that mean that our entire tax sysytem is inequitable? No. These authors are taking factoids and turning them into something they're not. And Straw Man is eating it up.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/250.html#Data
here is the IRS statistics on tax. this is not some rich guy's take on tax policy. these are the cold hard facts. and it's not like this is hard to find. just go the fucking IRS website. which is why i get so worked up when i hear all this bullshit.
-
does everybody see what i'm talking about here? Straw man thinks that our tax system is not a progressive tax system and that it is skewed towards favoring the rich. HE IS WRONG. Period. But all they have to do is say it. And straw man will walk into the voting booth thinking that we do not have a progressive tax system in the US. I'll say it again even though it won't do any good. The top 10% of tax returns pay almost 60% of our tax bill. That is a progressive tax system. There is no way around it. Are there some tax advantages that are extended to the rich? Yes there are. Does that mean that our entire tax sysytem is inequitable? No. These authors are taking factoids and turning them into something they're not. And Straw Man is eating it up.
I never said the entire system was inequitable
do you believe that "solutions" to our problems need to be addressed at both revenue and spending or solely spending?
-
240. do you think the wealthy do not pay " lots of taxes"?
I believe I heard warren buffet and many others pay less % of their income than their secretaries.
It should be equal.
-
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/250.html#Data
here is the IRS statistics on tax. this is not some rich guy's take on tax policy. these are the cold hard facts. and it's not like this is hard to find. just go the fucking IRS website. which is why i get so worked up when i hear all this bullshit.
Nooooo. Not the facts. Don't try giving people facts. You'll just confuse (some) people. :)
-
I believe I heard warren buffet and many others pay less % of their income than their secretaries.
It should be equal.
yeah he was wrong about that. it's been more than verified.
-
I believe I heard warren buffet and many others pay less % of their income than their secretaries.
It should be equal.
it's not equal. you're right. not even close.
-
I never said the entire system was inequitable
do you believe that "solutions" to our problems need to be addressed at both revenue and spending or solely spending?
honestly. right now? solely spending. without a sliver of doubt in my mind.
-
honestly. right now? solely spending. without a sliver of doubt in my mind.
then you should probably stick with you vow of no further discussion with me on the topic because I believe the "solely spending" approach is ridiculous, short sighted and unfair....without a sliver of doubt in my mind
-
Nooooo. Not the facts. Don't try giving people facts. You'll just confuse (some) people. :)
it's simply hilarious that people on this board do not want to listen to a CPA or defer to IRS statistics. They want to defer to Mark Cuban. I was showing a couple of my co workers this thread and we all had a good laugh. However, one of them said it best. "People today have so much information coming at them that after a while they give up and just blindly follow the party with which they most align themselves. they are losing the ability to think for themselves."
I thought that was pretty spot on.
-
then you should probably stick with you vow of no further discussion with me on the topic because I believe the "solely spending" approach is ridiculous, short sighted and unfair....without a sliver of doubt in my mind
you're absolutely right. why in the fuck would i have a discussion with someone who doesn't even know what kind of tax system we have in the US, let alone discuss how to fix it? You think that the rich pay less in tax then the poor. You've blatantly said that you will defer to Cuban and Buffett before you will take a look at statistics coming directly from the IRS. LOL.
-
you're absolutely right. why in the fuck would i have a discussion with someone who doesn't even know what kind of tax system we have in the US, let alone discuss how to fix it? You think that the rich pay less in tax then the poor. You've blatantly said that you will defer to Cuban and Buffett before you will take a look at statistics coming directly from the IRS. LOL.
I didn't say the rich pay less in tax than the poor and I even made a distiction between those people who earn high income as W2 wage earners vs those whoo derive their high income from non-wage sources.
-
it's simply hilarious that people on this board do not want to listen to a CPA or defer to IRS statistics. They want to defer to Mark Cuban. I was showing a couple of my co workers this thread and we all had a good laugh. However, one of them said it best. "People today have so much information coming at them that after a while they give up and just blindly follow the party with which they most align themselves. they are losing the ability to think for themselves."
I thought that was pretty spot on.
That is spot on for some folks. No doubt. Anyone who takes a realistic look at the tax statistics will know that Obama is misleading the public.
-
it's simply hilarious that people on this board do not want to listen to a CPA or defer to IRS statistics. They want to defer to Mark Cuban. I was showing a couple of my co workers this thread and we all had a good laugh. However, one of them said it best. "People today have so much information coming at them that after a while they give up and just blindly follow the party with which they most align themselves. they are losing the ability to think for themselves."
I thought that was pretty spot on.
They don't care. All they're interested is stealing from the productive to give to the parasites. They don't care about facts, statistics or reality. All they care about is getting what their owed (i.e. everything you've got).
In their eyes, your money doesn't belong to you. It's theirs for the taking and they're being generous by letting you keep ANY of it.
-
I believe I heard warren buffet and many others pay less % of their income than their secretaries.
It should be equal.
here's the source and the quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1
I'm not aware of anyone proving this quote is not accurate
Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
-
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/250.html#Data
here is the IRS statistics on tax. this is not some rich guy's take on tax policy. these are the cold hard facts. and it's not like this is hard to find. just go the fucking IRS website. which is why i get so worked up when i hear all this bullshit.
LMFAO your link is proof for bears points...
the fact is its a progressive tax system. The more income you make through salary and pay the more you pay period.
Buffets point is that b/c the majority of his income come in capital gains that by comparison his total tax rate paid is less than his secretaries b/c hers comes from salary or regular pay...
He is leaving out a very crucial step in his assesment of the situation and so are you...
everybody who has capital gains pays those taxes, by your link the top 25% pay 86% of all income tax...
-
here's the source and the quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1
I'm not aware of anyone proving this quote is not accurate
essentially what he is doing is trying to calculate his marginal tax rate. what Buffett is saying could possibly be true. However, his return would fall into a very small percentage of returns with AGI as high as his own. like less than 1% percentages. This is from statistics gathered by the IRS, not from me. He most probably pays for meticulous tax planning but to fall in that range that he claims to be in is very rare even for the best tax planners. I can honestly not conjecture on the veracity of his claims as i have not seen the returns in question.
Either way, what these journalists are doing are simply making huge assumptions about several returns based upon Warren Buffett's claims about a few returns he saw. The statistics are quite clear on the breakdown on who pays what and the average marginal tax rates for each level of AGI and taxable income. If he is actually correct then this is most definitely the exception and not the rule. Trying to paint the picture otherwise without actually showing the returns so someone can actually verify this claim is just irresponsible. I would love to take a look at the returns.
Thinking what Warren Buffett said about a few returns he saw overrides the statistical analysis over 70 years by the IRS is just fucking stupid. I know it's what you want to hear but you're jumping the gun on this one without doing your homework.
-
Another example of a person who everyone knows is a brilliant businessman - but suddenly he'll be called a dumbass for agreeing with obama
Not a dumbass. Just an arrogant lying sack of shit that wants people who make 5000 times less than he does to pay more taxes. 240, billionares and multi millionares dont pay taxes. People making under a million DO pay taxes. Does Mark Cuban believe his equity should be taxed more? I bet you he doesnt.
-
I never realized how many millionares and billionares post on this board
don't worry guys
The "class wars" are over and you won (just look at how income disparity has grown in this country if you need some reassurance)
The Repubs will never let your tax rate to be raised by a marginal 2-3% (you know, back to those levels you paid during the socialist regime of Bill Clinton) much less to that rate you paid under communists like Reagan and his communist predecessors
It's really hard to understand why anyone even bothered to work back then considering how much they were being taxed.
-
Sorry Straw - I dont look at those people as the enemy.
And guess what straw - the original money used for investment was already taxed as income at the base level.
So buffet is full of shit and lying just to kneepad obama.
-
Great thread.
A real eye opener.
Welcome to the board, Bears!
-
Sorry Straw - I dont look at those people as the enemy.
And guess what straw - the original money used for investment was already taxed as income at the base level.
So buffet is full of shit and lying just to kneepad obama.
Are you JOKING ?
you consider more than half the country as your enemy
how many times have you written that you'd like to engage in some sort of violence against people who don't vote, think or simply believe the way you do
you consider the very process of democracy as your enemy
-
For those who didn't bother to read Buffets article (which I assume is everyone) he is talking about loopholes and various gimmicks that apply to the Super Rich
he's not talking about high income wage earner who's pulling in multiple six figure salary, bonus, commission etc (W-2 wages)
-
For those who didn't bother to read Buffets article (which I assume is everyone) he is talking about loopholes and various gimmicks that apply to the Super Rich
he's not talking about high income wage earner who's pulling in multiple six figure salary, bonus, commission etc (W-2 wages)
Well then go tell that to Obama since his boguis tax scam does in fact apply to W2 wage earners.
-
Well then go tell that to Obama since his boguis tax scam does in fact apply to W2 wage earners.
there is no "bogus tax scam"
seems like reality is your enemy today as well
-
there is no "bogus tax scam"
seems like reality is your enemy today as well
His bogus plan applies to all filers over 200k Straw - not the Billionaire Jet owners he rails about.
-
His bogus plan applies to all filers over 200k Straw - not the Billionaire Jet owners he rails about.
post a link
-
post a link
Dear God - go to any freaking news site.
-
Dear God - go to any freaking news site.
dude
I've told you many many many time
I believe nothing you say without a source
for all I know you're confusing the sunsetting of the Bush Tax cuts
-
dude
I've told you many many many time
I believe nothing you say without a source
for all I know you're confusing the sunsetting of the Bush Tax cuts
That's part of what his overall plan is counting as deficit reduction. Its a tax hike no matter how you count it.
-
That's part of what his overall plan is counting as deficit reduction. Its a tax hike no matter how you count it.
so you are merely referring to the sunset of the Bush tax cuts (which should have already happened by now) ?
didn't the tax cuts add ~ 1 trillion + to the deficit already so why sholdn't he count that as deficit reduction when they finally expire
-
so you are merely referring to the sunset of the Bush tax cuts (which should have already happened by now) ?
didn't the tax cuts add ~ 1 trillion + to the deficit already so why sholdn't he count that as deficit reduction when they finally expire
They didnt ADD anything. Spending grotesque amounts of money ADDED to the debt.
-
I never said the entire system was inequitable
do you believe that "solutions" to our problems need to be addressed at both revenue and spending or solely spending?
Perhaps the most basic objection to Buffett’s plea is a practical one: the tax increases he suggests would barely begin to erase the deficit or the debt.
This point, while important, doesn’t affect Buffett’s central argument because Buffett himself conceded it to Charlie Rose: “I don’t think that what I’m talking about on taxes solves the deficit gap at all. But I think fairness is important.”
Buffett disagrees with you dude.
-
Perhaps the most basic objection to Buffett’s plea is a practical one: the tax increases he suggests would barely begin to erase the deficit or the debt.
This point, while important, doesn’t affect Buffett’s central argument because Buffett himself conceded it to Charlie Rose: “I don’t think that what I’m talking about on taxes solves the deficit gap at all. But I think fairness is important.”
Buffett disagrees with you dude.
disagrees about what?
from page 1 of this thread
the only "problem" it addresses is the inequity in the tax system.
It certainly won't (by itself) fix the deficit or pay down the debt but it's part of the equation
The Repubs won't even acknowledge that this IS part of the equation
I'm for a balanced approach that includes both revenue and spending
-
disagrees about what?
from page 1 of this thread
he agrees with me that its not going to help at all.
-
disagrees about what?
from page 1 of this thread
its not part of the equation. its a drop in the bucket.
-
its not part of the equation. its a drop in the bucket.
I really dont understand the point of all this crap. What does buffest want to do - raise cap gains to 39%? Yeah - brilliant - guess who gets hit the worst in that charade?
I mean really - WTF is this crap?
If obama wanted to say swap income tax rates w cap gains or something like that - fine make that argument.
However - what he is doing is pure garbage economics, garbage math, lying, distorting, and polarizing an issue he knows nothing about.
-
Again, we have a SPENDING problem far above and beyond where we have a TAXING problem.
Increased revenues only means more useless expenditures such as aid to Israel and Saudi Arabia, bloated Defense spending, tax loopholes for bullshit "Green" companies, government investments(LOL), and more bureaucracies.
-
I really dont understand the point of all this crap. What does buffest want to do - raise cap gains to 39%? Yeah - brilliant - guess who gets hit the worst in that charade?
I mean really - WTF is this crap?
If obama wanted to say swap income tax rates w cap gains or something like that - fine make that argument.
However - what he is doing is pure garbage economics, garbage math, lying, distorting, and polarizing an issue he knows nothing about.
and thats exactly my point. i am not wholly opposed to taking some additional tax revenue from the most wealthy if we need to. I want what's best for our economy. Period. My personal opinion happens to be that taking more tax money out of the rich is a completely futile act and will accomplish nothing good unless we get our ridiculous spending under control. and the fact that Obama's speech writers let him come out and say that the rich are paying less than the middle class and poor is ridiculous because the statistics are more than crystal clearthat this is incorrect.
-
its not part of the equation. its a drop in the bucket.
he must think it's part of the equation since he is in favor of it
I've also said (many times actually) that both sides of the equation need to be addressed.
btw - Buffett is not really in favor of any drastic spending cuts "right now" either
Here's the full interview (I think this is the one where your one sentence quote is from)
-
The problem Straw is that obama has ZERO credibility on the spending side of this.
-
he must think it's part of the equation since he is in favor of it
I've also said (many times actually) that both sides of the equation need to be addressed.
btw - Buffett is not really in favor of any drastic spending cuts "right now" either
Here's the full interview (I think this is the one where your one sentence quote is from)
no he doesn't. he wants to do this in the name of fairness. not because it will have any sort of significant impact on our situation. because it will not.
-
The problem Straw is that obama has ZERO credibility on the spending side of this.
a good part of the deficit under his administration is from debt incurred by former administration and problems (unpaid wars, economic meltdown) started under former administrations. It would have been nice (and fiscally responsible) if Bush said we have to raise taxes to pay for these wars. Instead he lowered taxes and increased spending which was a double whammy
Reducing spending is the key to deficit reduction but the revenue side is an indispensible part of the equation
-
a good part of the deficit under his administration is from debt incurred by former administration and problems (unpaid wars, economic meltdown) started under former administrations. It would have been nice (and fiscally responsible) if Bush said we have to raise taxes to pay for these wars. Instead he lowered taxes and increased spending which was a double whammy
Reducing spending is the key to deficit reduction but the revenue side is an indispensible part of the equation
Well Bama has spent three years completely neglecting that side of it and no one, including Senate Dems, are willing to go along with any more tax hikes until spending discipline is evidenced.
Solyndra alone is scaring anyone off from giving bama more money to spend.
-
Well Bama has spent three years completely neglecting that side of it and no one, including Senate Dems, are willing to go along with any more tax hikes until spending discipline is evidenced.
Solyndra alone is scaring anyone off from giving bama more money to spend.
yeah, maybe because when he got in office he was facing an economic meltdown
any chance you can remember that?
you can't start drastically slashing spending (especially domestic spending) unless your intention is to make things much worse, kill GDP even more, kill unemployment even more, and make the economic hole we gave to climb out of even deeper.
If you watch the the Buffet interview or read the NYT article you'll see he is in favor of spending cuts and entitlement reforms but not drastic changes at the present time
-
yeah, maybe because when he got in office he was facing an economic meltdown
any chance you can remember that?
you can't start drastically slashing spending (especially domestic spending) unless your intention is to make things much worse, kill GDP even more, kill unemployment even more, and make the economic hole we gave to climb out of even deeper.
If you watch the the Buffet interview or read the NYT article you'll see he is in favor of spending cuts and entitlement reforms but not drastic changes at the present time
And? Its not so much what was being spent - but what Bama spent it on. Ball washing plans, solyndras, union bailouts, unendning UI extensions, etc.
He has zero credibility on anything. Trillions of dollars and we have literally NOTHING to show for it.
-
Taxing "millionaires and billionaires" won't solve any problems, not even close. How many "millionaires and billionaires" are there in the U.S.? And I'm not talking wealth or what's in the saving account or other such things, I'm talking about taxable income. How many?
This is cover for a broad tax hike, it isn't just "millionaires and billionaires" it's people who make 200k and over or families that jointly file at 250k. It includes them too, but I guess they are flying around in private jets, lighting cigars with 100 dollar bills and twirling their mustaches in corporate board room...
Extracting more money out of the private economy to filter through inefficient govt. programs and hand out to people who don't produce anything is bad news. Same thing with the payroll tax cut...it's just stupid economics.
And dragging out Buffet, Cuban or even Ron Howard (WTF?!) to tell me they need to be taxed more is moronic and misleading. What are those 3 taxpayers annual income? They are representative of a very, very, very microscopic segment of the U.S. population.
Good grief.
-
Yeah let's tax more people so we can spend more money on solyndras, expensive muffins, ball washing, etc.
brilliant.
-
Yeah let's tax more people so we can spend more money on solyndras, expensive muffins, ball washing, etc.
brilliant.
don't forget pointless wars, tax credits for the wealthiest corporations, incredibly excessive defense spending, corporate welfare, etc..
-
don't forget pointless wars, tax credits for the wealthiest corporations, incredibly excessive defense spending, corporate welfare, etc..
Agree!
-
straw the problem is much more with spending and the amount of ppl that dont pay taxes then it is with the "rich's" tax rates.
that will account for very little, the big big BIG problem is spending...why not push to address that in a more aggresive fashion instead of taxes...
you do know the majority of the income tax receipts come from the middle class right?
thats whats going to need to be taxed in order to make revenue from income tax big enough to make a difference.
I said it before the election no matter who got in the tax rates would get hiked and the still will sooner or later
-
don't forget pointless wars, tax credits for the wealthiest corporations, incredibly excessive defense spending, corporate welfare, etc..
Im against corporate welfare and tax credits for the wealthiest corporations. Not so sure why you are against defending the country. Do you even care that ending the wars would only save about $100 billion per year? Defense spending is only at 5% of GDP. It was at 10-15% of GDP during the height of the Cold War. YOu are focusing on the wrong things.
-
a good part of the deficit under his administration is from debt incurred by former administration and problems (unpaid wars, economic meltdown) started under former administrations. It would have been nice (and fiscally responsible) if Bush said we have to raise taxes to pay for these wars. Instead he lowered taxes and increased spending which was a double whammy
Reducing spending is the key to deficit reduction but the revenue side is an indispensible part of the equation
The revenue part of the equation is a non starter Straw. DOing what Obama wants will only get you $700 billion over the next 10 years. Our debt is on course to increase to 21 trillion in 10 years. If you count Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, it is more like $30 trillion. Even if you do the intellectually honest thing and repeal everybody's tax cuts, that will only get you $3.5 trillion over the next 10 years. And that is from static analysis which assumes that these tax increases will have no negative effect on economic growth.