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.
My wife is a caretaker for a 5 year old child with Cerebral Palsy. The child is one of the 47% but I never really thought of him as a moocher and I can`t imagine who would hire him so he could pay some taxes.
Bulls*it. I`m trying to enlighten a poster as to who some of the 47% are. My father is a 91 year old WW2 vet who worked in a factory for 43 years. Add him to the list.
Let's assume Obama and the liberals want to reduce the deficit. Obama has offered no real spending cuts so the only other way to close the deficit is to increase revenue.
Increasing the tax rate on the wealthy simply will not cover the level of spending liberals want which is primarily our current level of spending plus pending Obamacare implementation. So the logical next step for liberals is to tax everyone else down the food chain.
Liberals please come out and say explicitly you want Americans, in particular middle class Americans to shoulder more of the tax burden to fund your social programs. A Test For Liberalism - NYTimes.com
You say no amount of tax increases on the wealthy would close the deficit. Yet, no amount of spending cuts, short of savagely slashing Medicare, Medicaid and defense will either. Mitch McConnell only identified $30 billion a year, which is essentially nothing.
Let's also remember that a month ago Romney/Ryan were attacking Obama for cutting Medicare, just what the GOP leaders are proposing now.
Any serious deficit reduction requires tax increases.
Personally, i don't see why reverting to the Clinton rates is the goal. I'd return to the Reagan rate, with a 50% top rate and higher capital gains. Those rates provided enough money for Revenue Sharing, which provided significant funds for poor states to fund education.
Bulls*it. I`m trying to enlighten a poster as to who some of the 47% are. My father is a 91 year old WW2 vet who worked in a factory for 43 years. Add him to the list.
Mine too. WW2 and more. 91 years old. Yep - he certainly is one of the 47% along with the disabled child. They have NO clue that they have offended well ~ at least 47% of the population.
I've said since the beginning that the Bush Tax Cuts should end for all Americans. Today. Those cuts should've never been made in the first place. Especially not during a damn trillion dollar war.
I agree, all bush era taxes should end for all americans, along with the abolishment of the IRS, repealing the 16th Amendment and instituting a 6% sales tax. no other taxes allowed after that, not one at all. no other state or federal taxes other than that 6% sales tax.
1 tax to cover everything. if the feds cannot make do with that 6%, then they should just all resign from office.
I agree, all bush era taxes should end for all americans, along with the abolishment of the IRS, repealing the 16th Amendment and instituting a 6% sales tax. no other taxes allowed after that, not one at all. no other state or federal taxes other than that 6% sales tax.
1 tax to cover everything. if the feds cannot make do with that 6%, then they should just all resign from office.
While the Bush Era tax-cuts were a mistake and should not have been passed, how can one take two opposite positions 1) end the Bush tax-cuts, and; 2) not have an IRS? For if one ends the tax-cuts, who will collect the money and determine who is cheating?
As for repealing the 16th Amendment, go ahead and work on that one. It only takes passing it by 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the States. Good luck with that one.
I just want to see Ed's taxes go up...nah, just kidding, he is probably apart of the 47% anyway. Actually many liberals, including me, wish to see the Bush tax cuts expire. I would like to see the top 1% expire now and then have the rest expire gradually as the economy gets better and we can return to Clinton era taxes, when taxes were realistic and respectable.
I would be surprised if Congress let's the Bush tax cuts expire and then make a bill for new tax cuts that excludes the wealthy and gets that passed.
You say no amount of tax increases on the wealthy would close the deficit. Yet, no amount of spending cuts, short of savagely slashing Medicare, Medicaid and defense will either. Mitch McConnell only identified $30 billion a year, which is essentially nothing.
Let's also remember that a month ago Romney/Ryan were attacking Obama for cutting Medicare, just what the GOP leaders are proposing now.
Any serious deficit reduction requires tax increases.
Personally, i don't see why reverting to the Clinton rates is the goal. I'd return to the Reagan rate, with a 50% top rate and higher capital gains. Those rates provided enough money for Revenue Sharing, which provided significant funds for poor states to fund education.
So your "solution" is to do nothing, allow the debt to reach unsustainable levels, and allow anarchy to occur, or the break up of the US? That seems to be the liberal "plan". How about Obama's magical $10 trillion coins?
Here is what will work, but no politician will do it
1. VAT 15%
2. constitutional balanced budget amendment
3. 20% across the board cuts in federal spending
4. earmark 10% of annual revenues for debt reduction
5. cut corporate taxes to 5% to reduce the impact of the VAT
6. eliminate Obamacare
This way, all the entitlements (sans Obamacare) are in place and we have a viable fiscal plan going forward. It would help to stablize the currency, increase business (after the short hit from the VAT), and improve bond values.
There is not enough money ANYWHERE ELSE to help us in our problem. Personally, I hope Obama gets everything he wants, such that he can destroy the nation so that we can start anew with separate, like minded smaller nations. It would be exactly what every lib wants- to distance themselves from conservatives. It is a win-win situation.
While the Bush Era tax-cuts were a mistake and should not have been passed, how can one take two opposite positions 1) end the Bush tax-cuts, and; 2) not have an IRS? For if one ends the tax-cuts, who will collect the money and determine who is cheating?
As for repealing the 16th Amendment, go ahead and work on that one. It only takes passing it by 2/3 of both houses of Congress and 3/4 of the States. Good luck with that one.
or you could be president and issue a executive order saying that no money be collected from the people concerning income taxes or social security.
My wife is a caretaker for a 5 year old child with Cerebral Palsy. The child is one of the 47% but I never really thought of him as a moocher and I can`t imagine who would hire him so he could pay some taxes.
What percentage of the 47% do the disabled represent? I'd be curious to know, and I don't think they should be counted.
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.
