U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 12,774,957 times
Reputation: 3536

Advertisements

G.O.P. Lawmakers Reject Obama’s Latest Tax-Break Plans - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

I guess the GOP is fine with tax cuts as long as it's for the rich.
Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,891 posts, read 15,781,549 times
Reputation: 3123
Well wait a minute aren't we told that Bush's tax cuts lead to the deficit and Obama is letting them lapse? So which is it? Do tax cuts increase the deficit? And if they do is it wise to increase the deficit after raising hte debt ceiling by $1.9 Trillion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,248 posts, read 20,620,972 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleLove08 View Post
G.O.P. Lawmakers Reject Obama’s Latest Tax-Break Plans - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

I guess the GOP is fine with tax cuts as long as it's for the rich.
Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
Pretty much describes them in a sentence. It is not only the tax cuts but look where they send billions of dollars- to red state wealthy farmers. When I see the Tea bunch raising hell about a 100 billion dollar farm welfare bill, I might find some ground with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,009 posts, read 15,192,948 times
Reputation: 3739
Just freakin' playing Santa Claus after getting spanked in Mass.

Doing the Clinton shuffle (toward the center). Should make liberals proud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 12,774,957 times
Reputation: 3536
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Well wait a minute aren't we told that Bush's tax cuts lead to the deficit and Obama is letting them lapse? So which is it? Do tax cuts increase the deficit? And if they do is it wise to increase the deficit after raising hte debt ceiling by $1.9 Trillion?
I'm for tax credits for certain things for the middle class and businesses provided the rich are taxed at a higher rate.

This is why I'm for a higher tax rate for the rich:

Quote:
A relative handful of Americans, says a key congressional panel, will take home more this year than half the nation's taxpayers combined.

Americans worried about the ever-intensifying concentration of wealth at America’s economic summit have been focusing of late, quite understandably, on the latest annual round of Wall Street bank bonus awards.

But we now have even more reason to worry about our savagely unequal distribution of income and wealth — from researchers at the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Earlier this month, that panel released income estimates for the coming year. They make for a sobering read.

In 2010, the tax panel calculates, a little over 1 million U.S. taxpayers will report incomes over $500,000. These 1 million top-earners will collect an astounding $241 billion more in income this year than the just under 80 million taxpayers who will take home less than $40,000.
Too Much weekly
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:39 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,009 posts, read 15,192,948 times
Reputation: 3739
Of course, all of the bailouts are for the fascist corporate regimes such as GM and AIG, and very little to nothing for small business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:45 PM
 
1,067 posts, read 1,740,068 times
Reputation: 460
Get real...
the tax cuts Obama proposes are illusions.

So he'll give a retirement credit to someone who can't afford to save a dollar for next week's meal... gee whiz...

BULL that's what this Congress is doing and we ought to have better.

Make sure a darned terrorist ain't lighting a ball/crotch bomb in the seat next to me in a plane...

Oh, better yet, tell our President that we aren't impressed with the so called party breakers at his events. Such silly non-sense is not impressing on any level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,891 posts, read 15,781,549 times
Reputation: 3123
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleLove08 View Post
I'm for tax credits for certain things for the middle class and businesses provided the rich are taxed at a higher rate.

This is why I'm for a higher tax rate for the rich:



Too Much weekly
"For simplicity, we'll just focus on the over-$250,000 group. Those reporting adjusted gross income of more than $250,000 to the IRS are projected to make up 2 percent of households next year, when the new president will take office. Those folks will earn 24.1 percent of all income, and pay 43.6 percent of all personal federal income taxes, the Tax Policy Center figures. Under either Obama or Clinton, they might pay even more."

FactCheck.org: What percentage of the U.S. population makes more than $250,000 per year? (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/what_percentage_of_the_us_population_makes.html - broken link)

Ok how much more will they have to pay for Obama's largesse? What effect do you think that will have on the economy? What effect will it have on the deficit? This was tried in the 70's. The top marginal rate was 70%. How did that work out for us?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,714 posts, read 14,839,263 times
Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
"For simplicity, we'll just focus on the over-$250,000 group. Those reporting adjusted gross income of more than $250,000 to the IRS are projected to make up 2 percent of households next year, when the new president will take office. Those folks will earn 24.1 percent of all income, and pay 43.6 percent of all personal federal income taxes, the Tax Policy Center figures. Under either Obama or Clinton, they might pay even more."

FactCheck.org: What percentage of the U.S. population makes more than $250,000 per year? (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/what_percentage_of_the_us_population_makes.html - broken link)

Ok how much more will they have to pay for Obama's largesse? What effect do you think that will have on the economy? What effect will it have on the deficit? This was tried in the 70's. The top marginal rate was 70%. How did that work out for us?

And you are pulling the 70% out of what exactly? Has anything been discussed about going even remotely that high?? No, so stop making crap up. What has been talked about is letting the tax cuts expire for the top two brackets. Those making over $250,000 will go back to the Clinton era rates. That seemed to work out pretty well......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2010, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,891 posts, read 15,781,549 times
Reputation: 3123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
And you are pulling the 70% out of what exactly? Has anything been discussed about going even remotely that high?? No, so stop making crap up. What has been talked about is letting the tax cuts expire for the top two brackets. Those making over $250,000 will go back to the Clinton era rates. That seemed to work out pretty well......

Actually nobody has said exactly how Obama plans to pay for his tax cut. Wasn't Bush criticised for that? Taxes who have to rise extrodinarily high on high income earners to pay for tax cuts and to cut into the deficit. 70% doesn't seem unrealistic.

As for Clinton and his tax rates. Please let me know what bubble you would like to substitute for the internet bubble Clinton benefitted from. Without that his administration would look far different.
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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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