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.
OP, not so. The GOP wants to cut taxes for all of us, not just for the wealthy. Let's keep it real.~
Yes, and at the same time complain about deficits that cannot be bridged unless taxes are raised or cruel cuts to popular programs, that the GOP always hated, are imposed.
One can certainly argue that cutting taxes is the means to eliminating these popular programs -- the "starve the best" scenario that Norquist advocated -- to cut taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to create a fiscal budget crisis that would then force the federal government to reduce spending.
The alternative to starve the beast is just to raise taxes to historically sensible levels.
The Senate could have passed the bill for 1 year without the pipeline and it would have been signed by the House.. It was the Senate that screwed it up like everything else they've done all year.
You are distorting the facts (as usual.) He is the timeline from The Hill;
Quote:
Dec. 7, 2010 — President Obama and the GOP strike a major tax policy deal. The accord, which extended the Bush tax rates for two years and included a one-year payroll tax extension, is attacked by liberals.
June 15, 2011 — Obama indicates he is open to extending the payroll tax holiday. He later calls for not only extending the holiday, but broadening the tax cut in 2012.
June 16, 2011 — House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) calls payroll tax cuts a “sugar high.”
July 21, 2011 — A group of 62 House Democrats sends a letter to Obama, objecting to the president’s plan: “We remain gravely concerned that yet another, unacceptable cut to Social Security’s revenue stream appears to be on the table.”
July 31, 2011 — Obama and the GOP strike a deal to lift the debt limit. The agreement creates a bipartisan, bicameral “supercommittee,” which is expected to tackle the payroll tax cut extension issue.
Aug. 14, 2011 — House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) expresses opposition to extending the tax cut holiday: “I’m not in favor of that. I don’t think that’s a good idea.”
Sept. 11, 2011 —Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), chairman of the House GOP campaign committee, calls a payroll tax cut extension “a horrible idea.”
Nov. 21, 2011 — Supercommittee members announce they were unable to reach a deal, leaving the payroll tax cut extension in limbo.
Dec. 1, 2011 — Asked whether letting the payroll tax holiday expire would hurt the economy, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said, “I’m not an economist. I don’t know what kind of impact it’s going to have on the economy."
Dec. 1, 2011 — Senate votes down dueling tax plans: The Democratic version goes down mostly along party lines, while the GOP version is soundly defeated, only attracting 20 votes.
Dec. 6, 2011 — House Republicans, split over the merits of a payroll tax holiday, start to craft their alternative measure as White House hammers the GOP.
Dec. 14, 2011 — House GOP gains political leverage by passing its payroll tax measure, 234-193. The bill includes provisions pushing Obama to make a decision on the controversial Keystone oil pipeline.
Dec. 15, 2011 — Senate Democrats and Republicans float the idea of a two-month extension to the payroll tax holiday.
Dec. 17, 2011 — The Senate passes a two-month extension to the tax holiday, 89-10. Obama hails the passage, but says it would be “inexcusable” for Congress not to extend the tax cut for the entirety of 2012.
Dec. 17, 2011 — During a conference call with House GOP members, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) suggests support for the Senate-passed measure, according to lawmakers. One GOP member on the call said Boehner said, “We have to pick our fights.” But dozens of Republicans balk at the Senate deal, and GOP leaders agree to fight it.
Dec. 20, 2011 — House votes to go to conference with the Senate, essentially killing the Senate measure. Seven Republicans defect.
Dec. 20, 2011 — Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), who is up for reelection in 2012 in a blue state, slams House GOP for “playing politics” with the tax vote.
Dec. 20, 2011 — Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) says the House GOP’s reluctance to pass bipartisan Senate legislation is “harming the Republican Party.”
Dec. 21, 2011 — Political pressure builds against House Republicans as Obama and congressional Democrats accuse them of seeking to raise taxes. The Wall Street Journal editorial page and former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove contend that House GOP should fold, and pass the Senate bill.
Dec. 22, 2011— Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) issues a statement calling on the House to pass Senate measure.
Dec. 22, 2011 — House Republicans cave, agree to pass the Senate bill once Democrats in the upper chamber agree to name conferees.
Dec. 23, 2011 — The House and Senate pass the measure by unanimous consent. Obama signs the bill into law.
It's clear from the timeline that Boehner used the pipeline as a way to attract votes for the payroll tax holiday from reluctant GOP lawmakers, as noted in the LA Times article.
Here, I'll fix the bold for you both Amendment XVI
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
So now back to the original question, how do they tax WEALTH under the Constitution?
By authority of my citation. I notice you FAILED to highlight where is says congress can lay and collect TAXES without the income qualifier in the amendment. FYI, amendments to the United States Constitution are appended to the body of the text without altering or removing what already exists.
Congress can and should consider a tax on the leisure class.
A person's net wealth, as opposed to his income, is a better measurement of his or her resources. Why should a kid just out of school, buried in student loan debt, pay the same taxes as a member of the leisure class' bonuses, stock options and perks.
Calculate your own net worth, and take one percent of that. Compare that wealth tax with your current tax bill, I was surprised, how about you? The current federal budget is roughly $3.8 trillion with a deficit of $1.25 trillion. Our current debt is over $15.1 trillion.
This country's wealth is about $190 trillion. A wealth tax of 2%, roughly $4 trillion a year, would erase the deficit and pay off the national debt in a few years.
You are distorting the facts (as usual.) He is the timeline from The Hill;
It's clear from the timeline that Boehner used the pipeline as a way to attract votes for the payroll tax holiday from reluctant GOP lawmakers, as noted in the LA Times article.
All that copy and pasting to not prove a dam thing other than validate what I said..
The HOUSE bill was for TWO months.. PERIOD.. and the House is Democratic.. The Democrats FAILED!!
A person's net wealth, as opposed to his income, is a better measurement of his or her resources.
Calculate your own net worth, and take one percent of that. The current federal budget is roughly $3.8 trillion with a deficit of $1.25 trillion. Our current debt is over $15.1 trillion.
This country's wealth is about $190 trillion. A wealth tax of 2%, roughly $4 trillion a year, would erase the deficit and pay off the national debt in a few years.
best way to tax wealth...not by way of an income tax...but a SPENDING tax
By authority of my citation. I notice you FAILED to highlight where is says congress can lay and collect TAXES without the income qualifier in the amendment. FYI, amendments to the United States Constitution are appended to the body of the text without altering or removing what already exists.
Congress can and should consider a tax on the leisure class.
I have no need to fail to highlight collecting taxes without the income qualifier because I never made such a stupid argument. Hell, I quoted the Constitution where it specifically lists income taes
A person's net wealth, as opposed to his income, is a better measurement of his or her resources. Why should a kid just out of school, buried in student loan debt, pay the same taxes as a member of the leisure class' bonuses, stock options and perks.
Calculate your own net worth, and take one percent of that. The current federal budget is roughly $3.8 trillion with a deficit of $1.25 trillion. Our current debt is over $15.1 trillion.
This country's wealth is about $190 trillion. A wealth tax of 2%, roughly $4 trillion a year, would erase the deficit and pay off the national debt in a few years.
Ignorance at its finest.. Why stop at 4%, why not go for 10% because that way we can not only pay off the debt in year 1, but have $17T a year in surpluses.. Think of how wonderful and prosperious we will be by taking so much wealth out of the economy every year
Yes, and at the same time complain about deficits that cannot be bridged unless taxes are raised or cruel cuts to popular programs, that the GOP always hated, are imposed.
One can certainly argue that cutting taxes is the means to eliminating these popular programs -- the "starve the best" scenario that Norquist advocated -- to cut taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to create a fiscal budget crisis that would then force the federal government to reduce spending.
The alternative to starve the beast is just to raise taxes to historically sensible levels.
They aren't cutting any entitlement programs.
They are not only cutting taxes but increasing spending.
How smart is that ? All they can ultimately agree on is to keep raising the debt ceiling.
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.
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.
TAX WEALTH instead of income.
