Per WSJ/NBC poll -81% of Respondent generally in favor of surtax on Millionaires

[Fury]

Ahahahaha, as if the Dems care about the economy or job creation when they spent the last 2 years doing everything BUT addressing the economic problems in this country.

The Dems have turned into quite the laughing stock.

Dude please, you act like the Dems are any better, they are just as if not more in the pockets of the highest bidder.

The multitude of Goldman Sachs employees and other Wall St./Corporate big wigs serving in positions for the Obama regime say hello!

You're talking to a wall here. Straw Man is the same dipshit that thinks the Dems aren't spending ENOUGH. 

[Soul Crusher]

Wall street gave mostly to dems last time.  Ge ceo heads bamas jobs panel.  Bama charging 30k a head for fund raisers etc. 


Yeah dems are for the little guy.  Ha ha ha.

[kcballer]

Dude please, you act like the Dems are any better, they are just as if not more in the pockets of the highest bidder.

That's very true and has been the sad reality of the Obama years thus far.  Too much rhetoric, not enough action.  Perhaps he would be seen as a great president were we in the 70's when media could be more easily controlled and distanced but in the here and now, he's failed to live up to the promise of change.

[Fury]

Wall street gave mostly to dems last time.  Ge ceo heads bamas jobs panel.  Bama charging 30k a head for fund raisers etc. 


Yeah dems are for the little guy.  Ha ha ha.

Hahahaha! He's done a great job fooling the lemmings like KCballer and Straw Man, that's for sure. They'd gladly follow this guy off a cliff.

[kcballer]

Hahahaha! He's done a great job fooling the lemmings like KCballer and Straw Man, that's for sure. They'd gladly follow this guy off a cliff.

And here comes the generalizations.  Doesn't take long does it? haha

[Fury]

And here comes the generalizations.  Doesn't take long does it? haha

What's there to generalize when you've done nothing but defend 99.99% of what this guy does? I call it like I see it.

[kcballer]

What's there to generalize when you've done nothing but defend 99.99% of what this guy does? I call it like I see it.

Hahaha yeah okay.   

[Soul Crusher]

Let's see - geither, summers, rubin, ratner the car czar, goldman people all over, citi hacks all over, etc, but yeah bama is for the working guy. 


What a joke. 

[Fury]

Let's see - geither, summers, rubin, ratner the car czar, goldman people all over, citi hacks all over, etc, but yeah bama is for the working guy. 


What a joke. 

I know plenty of working people who can afford $30k/plate fundraisers.

[Straw Man]

What's there to generalize when you've done nothing but defend 99.99% of what this guy does? I call it like I see it.

or you just make shit up when you don't see what you want

[Fury]

or you just make shit up when you don't see what you want

You mad? Quick, tell us again how well the post office is doing or how George Washington was as liberal as you are. 

[whork25]

Wall street gave mostly to dems last time.  Ge ceo heads bamas jobs panel.  Bama charging 30k a head for fund raisers etc. 


Yeah dems are for the little guy.  Ha ha ha.

Of course, they needed to bribe Obama.

They already had Bush in their pocket when he got elected, that was a much cheaper election for them

[Purge_WTF]

  We need to make the lower-class and the big corporations like GE pay taxes. Everyone pays them, or no-one does.

[Roger Bacon]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704728004576176741120691736.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

see article and full questionare at link

here are some other findings

74% in favor of eliminating tax credits for oil and gas industries
68% in favor of eliminating Bush tax cuts of > 250k income
44% in favor of gradually turning Medicare into voucher program - but 50% are opposed
45% in favor of eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood - but 53% opposed

You'd think both parties would be able to get behind ideas that are popular with 70-80% or at least not be opposed to them. 

If Repubs won't even consider raising taxes on the weathly (and we're talking about tiny increases that they won't even notice) or eliminating tax credits for the most profitable companies in the history of our planet then who do they really represent?

Million Dollars ain't that much these days, and i'm against punishing people for being productive.

[GigantorX]

That's great, people are in favor of taxing those that make more than them. Not too shocking.

But again, it's not a revenue problem that this nation has. Go ahead and tax some more those making over 250k and what you will get back in revenue will be comparable to someone pissing in the Atlantic Ocean so can we please stop going around and believing that it will even help?

1.7 trillion dollar deficit
3.5 trillion dollar budget

Those are the numbers that matter. Not 70-100 billion in additional tax revenue, and once again, there will still be a massive deficit so that 100billion in increased revenue will now go to servicing the debt.

We've all given our stands and thoughts on taxes, loopholes, corp. taxes etc, but revenue isn't the problem.

Class-Warfare misdirection, red herrings and propaganda is great at distracting us from the real problem. Spending.

[Straw Man]

Million Dollars ain't that much these days, and i'm against punishing people for being productive.

how is raising taxes by a few % (on people who have gained the most and wouldn't even feel the effect) to help out their country = punishment

why not call it an investment in their future prosperity since their future wealth (assuming they are business people and that's always how it is portrayed) is dependent upon a healthy economic environment

how about just rolling the tax rate back to the levels they were under Clinton.  Were the wealthy being punished in the 1990's?

[tonymctones]

how is raising taxes by a few % (on people who have gained the most and wouldn't even feel the effect) to help out their country = punishment

why not call it an investment in their future prosperity since their future wealth (assuming they are business people and that's always how it is portrayed) is dependent upon a healthy economic environment

how about just rolling the tax rate back to the levels they were under Clinton.  Were the wealthy being punished in the 1990's?

and you think giving money to the govt is whats going to cause this healthy economic enviroment? LMFAO really?

are you ok with 49% not paying any federal income tax at all straw? is that fair to you?

I love how you assume they will not feel it, that their children will not feel it, their grand children will not feel it.

The simple fact of the matter is that no matter how much we tax were still going to run a deficit b/c of SPENDING!!!

address the spending first and get that down to a reasonable level and then well talk about taking money away from ppl who have EARNED it

[Straw Man]

and you think giving money to the govt is whats going to cause this healthy economic enviroment? LMFAO really?

are you ok with 49% not paying any federal income tax at all straw? is that fair to you?
I love how you assume they will not feel it, that their children will not feel it, their grand children will not feel it.

The simple fact of the matter is that no matter how much we tax were still going to run a deficit b/c of SPENDING!!!

address the spending first and get that down to a reasonable level and then well talk about taking money away from ppl who have EARNED it

I already answered that question

I'm in favor of increasing taxes (slightly) on those who have benefited the most, who can actually afford it (slight increase in taxes won't change their life a bit)

nothing complicated, confusing or unfair about that

[Soul Crusher]

For what purpose since it will barely make a dent in the deficit and debt? 

[240 is Back]

For what purpose since it will barely make a dent in the deficit and debt? 

at this point, both parties know their bullshit fighting over 380million in total cuts.... total posturing.  Neither party will stop the debt.  Let that ceiling hit.  Fucccckit. 

[tonymctones]

I already answered that question

I'm in favor of increasing taxes (slightly) on those who have benefited the most, who can actually afford it (slight increase in taxes won't change their life a bit)

nothing complicated, confusing or unfair about that

LMFAO and what do you use to bolster your stance that "they wont feel it"?

so youre ok with 49% of the population paying nothing but think that 10% of the population paying 90% isnt enough?

just want to be crystal clear on this straw...