U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-27-2009, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Texas
43,546 posts, read 52,637,306 times
Reputation: 70790

Advertisements

The problem is that you may not create jobs by cutting taxes, but you definitely lose jobs by raising them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2009, 10:18 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,884 posts, read 13,030,934 times
Reputation: 5211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
No, YOU tell ME where all the jobs are that the repubs swore would appear if the rich got tax breaks.


And, YES, jobs will be created through our taxes....we pay into the government and now, hopefully the stimulus package will create jobs.....

wrong again


the goverment never has created 1 job, none at all. goverment never creates wealth, it just steals so it can survive another day.

also, how can a stimulus package create jobs when it is taking money out of the private sector in the 1st place?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 10:58 AM
 
Location: The Land of Lincoln
2,522 posts, read 3,923,734 times
Reputation: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by flexysteve View Post
They pay lower taxes because they donate much of it to charities of their choosing.
Definitely not true in the case of the Obama and Biden families.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 12:27 PM
 
4,586 posts, read 4,882,108 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
The problem is that you may not create jobs by cutting taxes, but you definitely lose jobs by raising them.

Why is shifting the tax burden onto those of us who can afford it a bad thing? I don't feel penalized for success. What ever happened to serving god and country as republicans like to tout? All of the people on this board who claim that raising taxes on 5% of Americans is bad are amongst the 100% that stand to benefit. Yeah, I meant 100% because all of us will benefit from everybody's overall success. Greed got us into this mess and greed would like us to stay in it for greeds sake. So many view money as power and view those with less money as powerless. I think republicans don't want to "share the power" much more than "share the wealth".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Marietta, GA
7,846 posts, read 14,879,405 times
Reputation: 3510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paige65 View Post
If you think high wage earners are going to downshift simply because there is a nominal tax increase, you've never been a high wage earner.
Wanna bet? I'm just barely in the group, but I've grossed just under or right at 250K for a few years now and been caught up in AMT for the last 4 years. I support a family of 5 on my income (wife and 3 children) and we are not even close to living "high off the hog." When my taxes increase, there are real cutbacks that take place in my budget.

I pay more in income taxes than some of these people gross in a year, and I'm called greedy for not wanting to pay any more. It's really a shame that being dependent on government is looked at as virtuous and to be rewarded with more handouts, while busting your butt and making as much as you can is looked at as evil and to be punished.

What do you think will happen when inflation takes hold and many people now cheering for higher taxes get caught up in the higher brackets and/or AMT?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Marietta, GA
7,846 posts, read 14,879,405 times
Reputation: 3510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank1906 View Post
Why is shifting the tax burden onto those of us who can afford it a bad thing?
Where do you get this crap..."those of us who can afford it" from? When will people realize that 200K - 250K/year isn't that much money in today's society, especially when you don't ask for government handouts? I cannot afford it, and I resent you volunteering and speaking for me.

I support a family of 5 on my income and save for college for my 3 kids, put money into my 401K and IRA, pay all my bills, and put away some rainy day money. I'm not living in a flashy house or driving flashy cars. I'm middle class.

Maybe I should just go 3 months delinquent on my mortgage, stop working so hard, and start taking advantage of some bailout money? I bet if I grossed 50K to 100K less than I do now, under Obama's plan I'd end up netting the same amount anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 01:21 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,313 posts, read 3,878,605 times
Reputation: 2561
I disagree with taking more taxes from the rich. I thought we Americans believe in fairness. I do not see how it is fair that because someone makes more money than I has to pay more taxes out the money he made from his work.

Second, we are seeing the reactions from companies at the stock market. Just about anytime the issue comes up people will buy less and less stock because that means losses because companies cannot risk more due to higher taxes.

Third, I do not have to be running a business to conclude that if I have to pay more taxes I will have to adjust to stay affloat. I may have to let go of some people, close down some services, or do whatever to maintain some profits to make up for losses on paying more taxes. That means more unemployment and less money for me to expand my business.

Fourth, sure someone may say that under the Bush administration things are the way they are now. Not totally accurate. I did not like how he handled some areas but it is also unfair to just put all the blame on the guy. A lot has to do with congress, also on a lot of government intervention on the economy.

One example I can think of, the Community Reinvestment Act. This act was started during the Carter years. Why? To make homes more affordable to minorities, mostly blacks. The act got modified during the Clinton years. This act was a strong pressure on the finance world to lend money to people that could not afford to buy a house and did not have good credit. If the banks did not want to do lend money, they faced coercive measures from the government that may cost them dearly so they had to bend and lend money. On top of that Freddy and AIG were created and run by who? The government! We now can see the consequences of just one act the government implement with meddling with the natural laws of capitalism. People just think Bush and nothing else. When the gas prices went so high not too long ago I kep hearing it was Bush's fault. Did anyone give him credit when it went so low? In all fairness either way in my opinion was not his fault of credit yet all people had in their mind is to blame the guy.

That is what we get for letting the government meddle too much in capitalist principles with socialistic programs.

Last but not least. If I am an individual that decides to work two jobs to make more money for whatever reason i.e. college for my kids, a home, a trip once a year to Europe, or simply to save for my retirement and I happen to earn above $250k a year and there is somebody else that simply is happy to have one job and does not care to make much should he pay less in taxes than I? Not at all in my book. I worked harder and I should not have to support somebody that has less initaitive and expect the government to pay for his kids college. The old American way was you earn everything you have with your own sweat.

Also, to tax people more if they make more than $250K makes no sense. I live in El Paso, TX and somebody out there lives in New York City. Who will get more out of his buck? I or that guy? I am. That is just one example of how sociolizing program across the nation can affect people so badly. That guy in NY has to hussle a lot more than I here in El Paso with $250K a year. If they are going to do that, it makes more sense to tax those at higher earning bracket based on a percentile in their own cities or states, not across the nation.

I read a humorous bumper sticker the other day. It said, "Work harder, people on food stamps depend on you".

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 03:21 PM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,313 posts, read 3,878,605 times
Reputation: 2561
By the way.
Where does the majority of tax revenues come from?
The top 10 percent or the bottom 10 percent of the population?

Please check it out and see who pay the most taxes to support the nation and yet those people are called greedy. Now compare the percentage of the population that pays the most taxes as compared with the percentage of those that pay the lowest and a lot of them pay nothing. See if the percentages have are in direct proportion or indirect proportion.

You have a great day.
El Amigo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 03:38 PM
 
939 posts, read 2,013,786 times
Reputation: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by neil0311 View Post
Wanna bet? I'm just barely in the group, but I've grossed just under or right at 250K for a few years now and been caught up in AMT for the last 4 years. I support a family of 5 on my income (wife and 3 children) and we are not even close to living "high off the hog." When my taxes increase, there are real cutbacks that take place in my budget.

I pay more in income taxes than some of these people gross in a year, and I'm called greedy for not wanting to pay any more. It's really a shame that being dependent on government is looked at as virtuous and to be rewarded with more handouts, while busting your butt and making as much as you can is looked at as evil and to be punished.

What do you think will happen when inflation takes hold and many people now cheering for higher taxes get caught up in the higher brackets and/or AMT?
I'm not calling you or anyone else greedy for not wanting to pay more. My point is that people are overreacting to the increase like it's never been at the proposed levels before. It has, for many years. I don't believe that the majority of people think that being dependent upon the government=virtuous/rich=evil. It's an overly simplistic view.

My other point is that if I'm in the $300,000+ group (which I am), I certainly wouldn't reduce my income to less than $250,000 because of a nominal tax increase. I also have a family, so that money is important to me as well. If I have to pay a little more, I'm not jumping for joy, but I realize that I'm fortunate and the increase is in line with tax levels of the last twenty years.

Finally, you may pay more than many people gross in a year, but what percentage of your income are you paying in comparison to theirs. How different is it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2009, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 19,457,650 times
Reputation: 6523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank1906 View Post
Why is shifting the tax burden onto those of us who can afford it a bad thing? I don't feel penalized for success. What ever happened to serving god and country as republicans like to tout? All of the people on this board who claim that raising taxes on 5% of Americans is bad are amongst the 100% that stand to benefit. Yeah, I meant 100% because all of us will benefit from everybody's overall success. Greed got us into this mess and greed would like us to stay in it for greeds sake. So many view money as power and view those with less money as powerless. I think republicans don't want to "share the power" much more than "share the wealth".
No greed is only part of what got us into this mess.
Gross mismanagment by our elected officials of Both Parties is the primary cause.
Over spending by most Americans is another reason. Charge it.....
The entitlment mentality is another factor.
And now finally we have this mentality that the Fed Gov and all those less than honest politicians know how to really spend our money better than we do.
This is why we are in trouble. We have abandoned the lessons of our grand parents. Worth having worth saving for. Spending on credit is the last choice and worst choice.
Personal responcibility is something for anyone but ourselves. And lastly its never our own fault it must be someone elses. Oh I bought a house I couldnt afford? Thats because the evil banker tricked me into it.
But to be fair look at the example our Fed and state gov sets. Spend it fast, spend it often don't worry if we have the cash to pay for it. We'll get more someday.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top