Degenerate's Tax the Rich Fixation

[Skull Pilot]

You can't have it both ways. Either the tax cuts were the cause of our current predicament or they weren't

The tax cuts caused our deficit to be bigger.


It doesn't need to close the deficit immediately. Good thing, too, because if it did the economy would suffer tremendously.

You see you can't say those that already pay 80% of income taxes do not pay their "fair share" when 50% pay no income taxes.

I thought we were all supposed to be in this together shared sacrifice and all that.

I didn't say anything about fair shares.

Of course you didn't. I asked you the question so are you going to answer it or not?

And I never implied that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would close the deficit immediately did I?

If the tax cuts are the cause of our deficit then they should expire for everyone not just for some.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Yep, we need a 50% income tax for dumb liberal bureaucrats to spend, waste and redistribute on even more entitlement and welfare schemes...........

For Fairness !!!!!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The tax cuts caused our deficit to be bigger.


It doesn't need to close the deficit immediately. Good thing, too, because if it did the economy would suffer tremendously.



I didn't say anything about fair shares.

Of course you didn't. I asked you the question so are you going to answer it or not?

You didn't ask a single question.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course you didn't. I asked you the question so are you going to answer it or not?

You didn't ask a single question.

Shouldn't everyone pay their fair share?

Aren't we all supposed to be in this together?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

After all if the bush tax cuts were so terrible we should just do away with them completely right?

They are in general a bad idea but raising taxes on the middle class during a recession is not a good idea, either.

They should all be restored once the economy recovers fully.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You didn't ask a single question.

Shouldn't everyone pay their fair share?

Aren't we all supposed to be in this together?

What is a "fair share" ?

 

[Koios]

100% is too much; also 35% is too little. Ergo why every Progressive I know of is advocating something in between.

Why is 100% too much? Look, you want to punish people for being more successful than you; so why stop at 50% or 60%? Make it clear that success will NOT be tolerated in this country. If you're an innovator and a job creator, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, you're not welcome here.

You of the left have spoken, we get it.

We'd be the equivalent of the Soviet Union, a failed experiment. The winning experiment, by orders of magnitude: Western Mixed Economies. Balance it seems, trumps extremism.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Shouldn't everyone pay their fair share?

Aren't we all supposed to be in this together?

What is a "fair share" ?

You tell us. The current president has been barking that nonsense for over four years. Apparently fair share means whatever the decider claims it means.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

What is a "fair share" ?

You tell us. The current president has been barking that nonsense for over four years. Apparently fair share means whatever the decider claims it means.

I don't know what he means when he says 'fair share', either. I find the terminology vague. So let's just not use it, shall we? Skull Pilot was the one who first started using it in this conversation - not me. You should maybe talk to him.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

But you know that "the rich" shoud pay more, right?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

The only thing an increase in taxes on the wealthy will solve will be to satisfy the ego's of illiterate socialists..............And that, not for long...........

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It's a feel good thing.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The only thing an increase in taxes on the wealthy will solve will be to satisfy the ego's of illiterate socialists..............And that, not for long...........

It will increase government revenue at a time of high deficit.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

But you know that "the rich" shoud pay more, right?

Yes.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

1.3 trillion in deficit
<100 billion in additional revenue per year for "tax the rich".

We're saved!

 

[Koios]

1.3 trillion in deficit
<100 billion in additional revenue per year for "tax the rich".

We're saved!

Not entirely, but a move in the right direction.

 

[Wiseacre]

Raising taxes on the rich was the cornerstone of President Obama’s reelection campaign. “If we’re serious about reducing the deficit,” Obama told a rally in Columbus, Ohio, on election day, “we’ve got to ask the wealthiest Americans to go back to the tax rates they paid when Bill Clinton was in office.”

But just how much deficit reduction would Obama’s tax hikes on the rich necessarily accomplish?

Nothing, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Letting tax rates rise to Clinton era levels for those families making over $250,000 a year would only raise $824 billion over ten years. That is not even enough revenue to undo the sequester that Obama promised “will not happen” during his final debate with Mitt Romney....

How much deficit reduction would Obama

Right now we're pissing money away that we don't have. And Obama and the dems what us to give them more? Fuck that.

If we're REALLY serious about reducing the debt/deficit, we'd find a way to bring our entitlement programs into a sustainable path. THEN we'd look at every aspect of gov't and decide if it's still needed and to what extent, and THEN we'd look at ways to accomplish those functions in hemost cost effectrive way. And THEN Only after all that should we look at how much more revenue we really need; and THEN we'd look at tax expenditures and loopholes and see if we can reformthe tax code to be more fair for everybody. ONLY THEN should we look at raising the tax rates.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

1.3 trillion in deficit
<100 billion in additional revenue per year for "tax the rich".

We're saved!

So we shouldn't close the deficit?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

1.3 trillion in deficit
<100 billion in additional revenue per year for "tax the rich".

We're saved!

Not entirely, but a move in the right direction.

More like a laughable joke of a a balanced budget initiative.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

1.3 trillion in deficit
<100 billion in additional revenue per year for "tax the rich".

We're saved!

So we shouldn't close the deficit?

This doesn't close the deficit. Not even close. About 1 trillion off on budget projections for this year, which currently stand at 1.1 trillion. Which I'm sure will actually be much higher...as they always are.