Obama Opposes Tax Cuts for "Rich"

B

bearice

President Obama and the Democrats in Congress seem determined to play the class envy game in the tax policy of our nation. While Republicans have stood firm in demanding that the Bush Tax Cuts should remain in effect for all Americans, Obama and his allies are resisting what he calls “tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”

The definition of these rich Americans has been artificially set at individuals who make more than $200,000 a year or families that make more than $250,000 a year. As a result, Democrats in Congress have elected to wait until after the midterm elections before voting on whether to extend the Bush Tax Cuts or to extend the tax cuts to only some Americans. Already, the ranks of the Democrat Party are beginning to weaken. Senator Jim Webb (D) of Virginia has said: “I think the $250,000 level is too low. I’m asking that it be raised.”

Complete article-:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/4760-obama-opposes-tax-cuts-for-qrichq
 
Quote from Scataphagos:

Can't somebody come up with a "non-Communist" plan for our problems?
More...

No because those currently in control of the Senate, the House and Presidency would like for nothing more than the US to revert to a communist-lite form of government.

I firmly believe that half of your Democrats would be in favor of communism over capitalism. The only problem is that they know the American people do not feel this way.
 
Refugees & H1Bs like Albert Einstein and Linus Torvalds contributed to the prosperity of America.
I call upon American intellectuals to migrate and contribute to rest of the world.
 
who the F#ck is going to pay for the $500,000,000,000 half a trillion dollar war debt bill!

10% of the population have 90% of the wealth..therefore they should pay for 90% of the debt.

most of the gov't debt is in the military..wtf should the poor pay for the military etc. or gov't bailouts.

taxes percentag or amount are based on affordability or ability of tax payer to pay.. $10,000 tax bill is a lot to a guy mking only $40,0000/year $10,000 to a guy making $250,000 isn't much. you can't squeeze blood from a stone...oh yeah the gov't even puts people in prison for not paying their taxes..no tax no representation is the reason their democracy.

if you don't want to pay tax just go a tax protest and demand lower taxes or lower gov'vt deficits . in the street.

it pisses me off when gov't think they can tax you because they feel like it. the gov't should give taxpayers a thank you note for paying taxes. tax is hard earned money especially for working people.

why pay tax only to see the gov't waste and burn the money.

Quote from bearice:

President Obama and the Democrats in Congress seem determined to play the class envy game in the tax policy of our nation. While Republicans have stood firm in demanding that the Bush Tax Cuts should remain in effect for all Americans, Obama and his allies are resisting what he calls “tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”

The definition of these rich Americans has been artificially set at individuals who make more than $200,000 a year or families that make more than $250,000 a year. As a result, Democrats in Congress have elected to wait until after the midterm elections before voting on whether to extend the Bush Tax Cuts or to extend the tax cuts to only some Americans. Already, the ranks of the Democrat Party are beginning to weaken. Senator Jim Webb (D) of Virginia has said: “I think the $250,000 level is too low. I’m asking that it be raised.”

Complete article-:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/4760-obama-opposes-tax-cuts-for-qrichq
More...
 
Quote from clacy:

No because those currently in control of the Senate, the House and Presidency would like for nothing more than the US to revert to a communist-lite form of government.

I firmly believe that half of your Democrats would be in favor of communism over capitalism. The only problem is that they know the American people do not feel this way.
More...

If we ever end up communists, you better either get out of the US or you and your kids will likely never see capitalism in your lifetimes. Remember that the USSR lasted about 70 years before communism collapsed there. Once we start walking on that path, it will be almost impossible to get off it.
 
Quote from peilthetraveler:

"... Remember that the USSR lasted about 70 years before communism collapsed there. Once we start walking on that path, it will be almost impossible to get off it.
More...

"Start"? We're already far down that path. It will take miraculous behavior for us to avoid "going Full Commie".. :mad: :mad:
 
The Bush tax cuts, implemented as they were at a time of greatly increased government expenditures, were a serious mistake. The tax policy being proposed by the present administration is simply a correction of an error made by the previous administration. If you want lower taxes you should champion less Federal spending first. Once spending is reduced, tax rates can go down. On a personal level, increasing expenditures and then deliberately decreasing revenues is what you might expect a lunatic to do. On a government level, it's a policy that shifts costs from direct taxation to inflation, with a net result, because of interest paid, of greater total cost.

I am personally in favor of paying for government directly, rather than indirectly through inflation. For at least two reasons. One is that paying directly makes it easier to keep track of what the actual cost is, and the other is that when you pay via "the installment plan" (inflation!) the net cost is greater because you have to pay interest on the money borrowed. (I will have to admit, however, that the government might at times be able to borrow at negative net cost in constant dollars at fixed interest provided lenders will except hugely inflated currency as payment. Sadly, lenders are not always as stupid as one might hope!)
 
What amuses me is the notion that a 250K income makes one wealthy. In a country where the truly wealthy have passive incomes that are an order of magnitude (or much more) greater than this...

It demonstrates to me that the "wealthy" are in fact not the target. In fact the "wealthy" love a higher marginal tax because it cuts entrepreneurs and others on the rise off at the knees, thus preserving the existing order. The super rich preserve their position by attacking the near rich. This is why many super rich individuals are leftists.

250K after tax struggles to maintain an upper middle class lifestyle in many areas of the country.
 
Quote from 1prometheus:

What amuses me is the notion that a 250K income makes one wealthy. In a country where the truly wealthy have passive incomes that are an order of magnitude (or much more) greater than this...

It demonstrates to me that the "wealthy" are in fact not the target. In fact the "wealthy" love a higher marginal tax because it cuts entrepreneurs and others on the rise off at the knees, thus preserving the existing order. The super rich preserve their position by attacking the near rich. This is why many super rich individuals are leftists.

250K after tax struggles to maintain an upper middle class lifestyle in many areas of the country.
More...

Your point is well taken. Everything is relative here. It is a sad commentary on economic shifts among the U.S. population over the last fifty years. There is great concentration of wealth at the high end, the upper middle class is shrinking, and those at the low end of the middle class are slipping into poverty. This is not good! If this trend is not reversed, class warfare, still higher crime rates, and societal instability can result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top