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.
Bottom 47% of wage earners pay no taxes. So no tax breaks should apply. Somehow, Obama has been giving them tax credits - which in reality is government spending.
Everyone who pays taxes should have a rate cut to spur economic activity.
Corporate tax rates need to be drastically reduced as we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world.
We tried that with the Bush Tax cuts and look where we are. The conservative movement in this country have been on the "Trickle Down Economics" kool-aid since the Reagan Administration. It's no coincidence since that time the income levels of the richest Americans have increase faster than any other group.
By your logic the economic boom of the 1990's should have never occurred after President Clinton raised taxes, but it did. Right now, the richest Americans and corporations are paying the lowest tax rates since prior to World War II. In light of the fact they have enjoyed the greatest increases in wages in comparison to all other income groups in the last decade. It makes sense they should have a greater tax burden than they currently do.
And we've tried "trickle up" liberalism and it left us with double digit unemployment, inflation, interest rates and an energy crisis to boot, or don't you remember the 70's?
Corporations should pay no taxes. It's just a way for politicians to look good while raising the working man's taxes and fooling him into thinking somebody else is paying.
Another trickle up legacy is unfunded liabilities approaching $100 trillion dollars. In any other reality those people would be the real criminals. They'd be held responsible for their robber baron tactics but, of course, they use humanitarian reasons for their tactics. How humane will they be will the chickens come home to roost and there is nothing left, we've run out of money and freebies?
Corporations should pay no taxes. It's just a way for politicians to look good while raising the working man's taxes and fooling him into thinking somebody else is paying.
Exactly! As if the corporations pay their own taxes. Only the truly ignorant don't understand how taxes are passed on to the consumer.
We tried that with the Bush Tax cuts and look where we are. The conservative movement in this country have been on the "Trickle Down Economics" kool-aid since the Reagan Administration. It's no coincidence since that time the income levels of the richest Americans have increase faster than any other group.....
How anyone can possible say that the current economic condition is because of the Bush Tax cuts is beyond me... it's just another excuse to "blame Bush" for everything. While I certainly have no love lost for many of his economic positions, especially how he cow-towed to the Dems on entitlements, but his tax cuts only served to stimulate the economy. What liberals have no comprehension of is the fact that businesses hire people and, if they are not profitable and if they cannot see a bright future, people don't get hired. THIS Administration is doing its darndest to destroy the private sector by enlarging the public sector. We are rapidly becoming a nation that is more and more Dependant on government for ALL our needs and, if it doesn't turn back to the private sector and easing of the restrictions on free enterprise, we will ALL be wagging our hand at the government cash register. I know it's impossible for liberals to understand this because all you see is the "evil" of free enterprise and the "greed" of the capitalists, so I won't bother to belabor the point.
By your logic the economic boom of the 1990's should have never occurred after President Clinton raised taxes, but it did. Right now, the richest Americans and corporations are paying the lowest tax rates since prior to World War II. In light of the fact they have enjoyed the greatest increases in wages in comparison to all other income groups in the last decade. It makes sense they should have a greater tax burden than they currently do.[/quote]
By your logic --- well, let's just say "by the logic of the mainstream liberal establishment" --- if Clinton can "own" the boom of the 90's, then Obama MUST own the decline of the last 20 months. Checkmate.
The mere fact that the term "Filthy Rich" tells it all:
The "rich", by whatever measure one measures wealth, are deemed "filthy", eg; "dirty". The perception by someone who has less, but wants more, is that those who do have more don't deserve it and are de facto "dirty". Ergo the entitlement mentality and all the rhetoric about how those with wealth have it because they made it on the backs of the poor. Never mind that maybe they sacrificed more than their "less fortunate" counterparts, worked harder, risked it all, and somehow made it through to the other side. Forget the 18 hour days, eating peanut butter and mac & cheese in hopes of a better life.
It's always the same - those who think they are "do-gooders" and have more compassion than the evil, filthy, bastardly "rich" people will forever demonize those who have made a good life for themselves... that is, until THEY make a pile of cash. Then it's all about the next biggest evil.. the corporations. Then, when they make it to the CEO position of a big company, they revert it back on the backs of the "wealthy" (that is, the OTHER" people who are wealthy) and pose as benevolent masterminds of community betterment. It's all smoke and mirrors to advance their own twisted ideology.
I still want to know why we never talk about the "working rich?"
Or the filthy poor.
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.