Obama to propose $1.5 trillion in new tax revenue

[gopher]

Exactly! They are the ones who profited from every war, tax abatement, preference item, and other things. So while the middle class has been forced to pay taxes, the rich have sheltered monies overseas and have not paid anything. Just force them to pay their share and the deficit will be ended and the budget balanced without tax increases.

 

[damngrumpy]

The trillion in taxes proposed has to do with putting an end to the biggest welfare scheme
in the history of America. That being the free ride the rich have been blessed with for more
than a decade now. It is always said there is no free lunch, but the richest two percent of
Americans have been enjoying a free lunch for years and its time for them to belly up to the
bar.
Come to think of it, Obama should increase taxes to pay for the cushy life Americans want
and demand. If they want all the trimmings they should be paying for them, that is how it
works if you are to balance the budget. It is either cut services and entitlements or have
the shared cost reflect the reality of the true cost of programs. For years Americans and for
that matter Canadians have been living in a dream world thinking all these services arrive
through walking through the doorway of the department of programs what ever they may be.
That blood test you get when ordered by the Doctor is not free, the visit to the Doctor is not
free, Social Assistance it not free, pensions for seniors, veterans, the disabled and so on are
not free
We demand the cost of a loan is disclosed, Government in short demands disclosure from
everyone else except themselves. Would it not be smarter to disclose the true cost of
services not only to the public but for a short time to the patient. I would like to see a real
promotion campaign, where by after you go to the Doctor the government sends a costing
of that visit, or for a pension check or family tax credit, or social assistance check. Once a
year send a costing to each citizen, to remind them the services are not free and you and I
are paying for them. Perhaps some might be more responsible when accessing these
services.
Yes all should pay their share, and in American the wealthiest are not currently paying their
way as it were. I also believe even those on assistance should pay ten bucks in tax to
share the burden, its a token but it is a mental message as well that nothing is free.
Obama is doing a good thing here, Bush gave them a tax holiday and now the vacation is
over, welcome to the real world.

 

[captain morgan]

The Republicans don't dispute there are enough loopholes to drive a truck through it, however their argument is "class warfare" and that taking money out of the hands of the "job creators" is bad for the economy. My argument is they don't create jobs they export jobs. Perhaps they look at it from creating jobs by spending disposal money. I think they'll buy their toys no matter how it's sliced.

It is class warfare... The mantra is that the "rich" aren't paying their fair share.. How is that possible when a substantial number of Americans (I've heard around 50%) don't pay federal taxes at all?

Whether you like it or not, gvt money originates from the private sector so if your argument is that gvt is a major employer, the salaries are all collected from the private sector (incl the employees themselves). That system can not prosper without the input of money from an outside source, otherwise it simply implodes in on itself.

As far as the "rich" are concerned in creating jobs, all you need to look at is the amount of private sector dollars in the NASDAQ, NYSE, etc and you'll have an idea relative to what companies are being financed by this group to create business, jobs, income and taxes.

 

[gopher]

The mantra is that the "rich" aren't paying their fair share.

That is truth, not political mantra. Otherwise, there wouldn't be trillions sheltered overseas.

 

[captain morgan]

Why shouldn't the super rich pay their fair share of taxes? Really. I admire Warren Buffet for standing up and stating that they should. That said, there isn't a hope in hell that this will fly.

The Warren Buffet example is being used out of context.. He is sheltering income by spending equal amounts in other areas (ie charities) to offset any personal monies that he takes. The flip-side of this is to hammer the wealthy even harder with a more aggressive progressive tax rate and watch the charitable monies (among other sources) vanish overnight... You'll still have the same pressures to fund these groups - it will just come out of the public purse or they will cease to exist.

Lastly, in considering "fair share", what's your take on that considering a large % of Americans do not pay federal taxes at all?.. What is their "fair share"?

That is truth, not political mantra. Otherwise, there wouldn't be trillions sheltered overseas.

Got any proof?

On that note, why do you think that this money is overseas? What do you think happens when Obama makes these threats - wealthy individuals and corporations will flock to the USA to get the sh*t kicked out of them?

 

[Kreskin]

It is class warfare... The mantra is that the "rich" aren't paying their fair share.. How is that possible when a substantial number of Americans (I've heard around 50%) don't pay federal taxes at all?

Whether you like it or not, gvt money originates from the private sector so if your argument is that gvt is a major employer, the salaries are all collected from the private sector (incl the employees themselves). That system can not prosper without the input of money from an outside source, otherwise it simply implodes in on itself.

As far as the "rich" are concerned in creating jobs, all you need to look at is the amount of private sector dollars in the NASDAQ, NYSE, etc and you'll have an idea relative to what companies are being financed by this group to create business, jobs, income and taxes.

That's all the past debt of the US sitting in the NASDAQ/NYSE. Time to get some of it back.

 

[captain morgan]

That's all the past debt of the US sitting in the NASDAQ/NYSE. Time to get some of it back.

You'll have to explain that. I don't understand what you mean.

 

[gopher]

Got any proof?

We have discussed this on previous occasions and I have posted previous links (including one from the Fox network) all of which have been ignored.

 

[captain morgan]

We have discussed this on previous occasions and I have posted previous links (including one from the Fox network) all of which have been ignored.

I'll look around and see if I can find some info from the US gvt stats offices regarding the tax contributions of the different demographics. If it's anything like Canada, the top 10% income earners pay around 40% of all of the taxes (personal contributions).

Regardless, the fact remains that a substantial % of Americans do not pay taxes at all.. That said, I can not fathom the comment that the "rich" aren't paying their "fair share" when 1/2 of the population aren't paying taxes at all.

 

[JLM]

The trillion in taxes proposed has to do with putting an end to the biggest welfare scheme
in the history of America. That being the free ride the rich have been blessed with for more
than a decade now. It is always said there is no free lunch, but the richest two percent of
Americans have been enjoying a free lunch for years and its time for them to belly up to the
bar.
.

Huge mistake- What percent of the population does the richest 2% employ? 20%, 30%?

 

[captain morgan]

Huge mistake- What percent of the population does the richest 2% employ? 20%, 30%?

Good question JLM.

There is a lot of misinformation here, and that is one of the biggest problems here, no one wants to learn any truths that horn-in on their "entitlements".

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

As I said earlier. Stephen King is an Uber Rich with a net worth of $200 million and he is in the 50% tax bracket.

For the sake of argument: Half of $200 Million is $100 million and you want him to pay more?

 

[Nuggler]

I thought you had me on ignore?

What's it gonna be?

Look dude you can't have it both ways. If you ignore someone, you really have to ignore them and I'm cool with that, but keep in mind ignoring someone does not insulate you from being criticized for making a ridiculous post.

Or a poor attempt at humour.

Oh I did for a while, and one can switch from ignore to not. But, why should I keep you on ignore. You're quite a laugh most of the time. Don't wanna miss ALL the good stuff, speaking of ridiculous posts.

""What's it gonna be?

Look dude you can't have it both ways."""

That's the funny part. You telling anyone what they have to do, or what they can have. Last I checked, you weren't in charge of a whole hell of a lot.

 

[TenPenny]

I like the idea that raising taxes would be 'class warfare', but cutting social spending for poor, disadvantaged people would not be.

 

[JLM]

I like the idea that raising taxes would be 'class warfare', but cutting social spending for poor, disadvantaged people would not be.

Should a person be taxed more than the cost of services he uses or potentially could use?

 

[mentalfloss]

1.5 Trillion just off of taxing the rich?!?

HOLY S HIT

This will be the first actual good move Obama's made if he pulls it off.

Should a person be taxed more than the cost of services he uses or potentially could use?

All this depends on the situation the state is in at the time. And it's pretty clear, that this is the time for the U.S. to quash its grossly unequal distribution of wealth. If they follow the fundamentalist capitalist route, there will be no saving the economy.

Conservatives need to understand that this is not "crazy socialism". It's a fact that the economy in the U.S. cannot survive on stimulus packages. Somebody has to pay, and unfortunately for the rich, it cannot be the poor or middle class. You'll cripple the entire nation if you do that.

 

[JLM]

1.5 Trillion just off of taxing the rich?!?

HOLY S HIT

This will be the first actual good move Obama's made if he pulls it off.

That equates to 6 million people paying $250,000 each.....................a little steep don't you think?

 

[TenPenny]

Should a person be taxed more than the cost of services he uses or potentially could use?

Only if he wishes to be part of society.

 

[mentalfloss]

That equates to 6 million people paying $250,000 each.....................a little steep don't you think?

I don't know the specifics of how many people and how much tax, so it's foolish to be making assumptions either way.

Only if he wishes to be part of society.

The defenders will lambast you for making a statement of "entitlement". The problem with this position is that the economy completely goes to the ****ter without the middle class. The rich actually need them to continue to prosper as well.

 

[WLDB]

Sorry, but that just sounds like a cop out. Would your answer be the same if a right-wing president contradicted himself like this?

Sure. And I'd hardly call Obama left wing.