Mitt's economic advisor says 'tax the rich'

[Luddly Neddite]

Glenn Hubbard, Romney Economic Adviser: 'Bulk Of The Adjustment' Should Be Borne By The Wealthy

Speaking with CNN's Fareed Zakaria about shifting taxes to reduce the deficit, Hubbard [Mitt's economic adviser] said "The bulk of the adjustment [should] be borne by upper income households." Romney was willing to "put everything on the table," Hubbard continued.

Mr Etch A Sketch has always said just the opposite so I wonder if he has been told what he has "on the table". For that matter, I wonder if Mitt's one percent cronies know good ole Mittens is planning to engage in some "class warfare".

Gotta love the Clown Car Politicians.

 

[Ariux]

Gotta love the middle-class shitheads who defend the under-taxed (relatively speaking) rich.

 

[Avorysuds]

Answer the questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

 

[Avatar4321]

Well, they are wrong.

 

[Avorysuds]

Gotta love the middle-class shitheads who defend the under-taxed (relatively speaking) rich.

Gotta love the welfare poor that pay no taxes but get stuff from the Government yet 100% support others paying more in taxes.....

votes bought.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Gotta love the middle-class shitheads who defend the under-taxed (relatively speaking) rich.

Gotta love the welfare poor that pay no taxes but get stuff from the Government yet 100% support others paying more in taxes.....

votes bought.

There you have it folx ... Real Class Warfare.

And the poor are losing.

 

[Jarhead]

Gotta love the middle-class shitheads who defend the under-taxed (relatively speaking) rich.

Gotta love the welfare poor that pay no taxes but get stuff from the Government yet 100% support others paying more in taxes.....

votes bought.

those who get stuff, dont pay
Those who dont get stuff, pay
Those that dont pay push for those that pay, to pay more.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Answer the questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

You wont get those answers because the reality of the situation is that even if you tax the rich at 90%, which would be political and economic suicide, it would still not touch the deficit spending we have going on. Not to mention the capital flight would ensue worse than it is now.

It's a talking point for political pandering adn has no basis in reality of deficit/debt burdens of the US.

Mitt Romney, unsurprisingly, will say anything, just like Obama, to garner support for his Comedian n Chief position.

 

[Avorysuds]

Gotta love the middle-class shitheads who defend the under-taxed (relatively speaking) rich.

Gotta love the welfare poor that pay no taxes but get stuff from the Government yet 100% support others paying more in taxes.....

votes bought.

There you have it folx ... Real Class Warfare.

And the poor are losing.

I'm not sure you even know wtf you just said... What I said was 100% right, sooooo.... How are "the poor" losing when they get LOTS of stuff from the Government, federal and state yet pay ZERO taxes? They gets schools, military, roads, parks, fire/police and everything else yet pay either zero in taxes or maybe a few thousand or hundred in taxes a year. On top of that many get SS/MC/MC and other forms of welfare yet never paid anything close to what they take out of the system.

 

[Avorysuds]

Answer the FUCKING questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the beginning of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

 

[Leweman]

too bad the government sucks at the redistribution of wealth

 

[Avorysuds]

Answer the questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

You wont get those answers because the reality of the situation is that even if you tax the rich at 90%, which would be political and economic suicide, it would still not touch the deficit spending we have going on. Not to mention the capital flight would ensue worse than it is now.

It's a talking point for political pandering adn has no basis in reality of deficit/debt burdens of the US.

Mitt Romney, unsurprisingly, will say anything, just like Obama, to garner support for his Comedian n Chief position.

Correct, but I want them to run the numbers for me. Even if you taxes the SHIT outa the rich and gained 100 billion in taxes we are still running 1.4ish TRILLION in a deficit every year. I'm just gonna guess and say that's 30ish% taxes raised on the rich on top of what they already pay and I'm prolly very low with that number. Then of course if you take into account the disaster that will follow when 30% taxes hit "the rich" we prolly won't even see 50 billion of that revenue as "the rich" hide their money, stop spending/investing or just leave the country.

 

[SniperFire]

Nice fake quote in headline to give misleading impression.

People with '0' reputation should not be permitted to spam the board with new threads.

 

[Avorysuds]

How Much Money Do The Top Income Earners Make By Percentage? | Financial Samurai

All I did was add the top 1 -5 and 10% earners total taxes paid in 2010. That would be about 1.7 Trillion in collected taxes. Now I added a 30% unavoidable tax rate added on top of what these groups pay and I would collect around 650 billion more in taxes. This means that at around 50% tax rates we get a whole 650 billion more in taxes in a year.

Top 1%: $380,354

Top 5%: $159,619

Top 10%: $113,799

If you just tax the top 1% as people claim they want you get about 120 billion in new revenues at 30% unavoidable tax rates. You have to include your middle class and upper middle class to get the 650 billion and once again that means you would have economic disaster as people that used to make 113 thousand a year and based their lives (home, car, food and so on) on that income would now be making around 80k a year...


Now, what do you do with all of these revenues? use either number, 650 billion or 120 billion... Remember if you use that 650 billion number you will be in a depression by the end of the year, if you use the 120 billion you will just be in a horrible recession.

 

[Avorysuds]

Nice fake quote in headline to give misleading impression.

People with '0' reputation should not be permitted to spam the board with new threads.

That would be a very good idea.

 

[DontBeStupid]

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

For starters, all Bush Era Tax Rates need to go away. This will raise ALL taxes (ie. broaden the base) back up to Clinton levels. At their worst, Clinton levels brought in 17.5% of GDP in tax revenue. That would give us, today, $2.7T in revenue, $400B off our deficit. Once we were back to 5% unemployment, we could get 19% of GDP, which would be $2.945T, and out deficit is almost cut in half. Just by allowing Bush Rates to go away.

Next, capital gains taxes are taxed as income. Always. Period. This has been estimated to bring in $100B a year in revenue.

Then, businesses, since they're people, need to pay their fair share. Effective rates for companies are around 1% of GDP. This is 1/6 what it was in the 50s. Raise rates back to the level of the 1950s. This would give us some $700B more a year in revenue and the deficit is gone.

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

It goes to programs that help the largest number of citizens.

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

History has not shown that. Also, we're talking about levels from the Clinton Era and from the 1950s. Is there anyone who thinks those times were not good?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

Asked and answered. This plan would balance the budget and would be shared by a large number of people.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Uh, weren't we told that Mittens is a Conservative?

Too late, Republitards get fooled again!

 

[Ariux]

Answer the questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

The rich should pay at least the same percentage as the middle class - all taxes combined. Got a problem with that, shithead? The rich should pay an additional 10% of their income, based on their ability to pay and their ability to shield income from being counted as income. Got a problem with that, shithead?

It'll bring in more revenue. I'm not the absolute f-ing moron you are who reasons if that if it doesn't raise enough to close the deficit then it shouldn't be done.

 

[Avorysuds]

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

For starters, all Bush Era Tax Rates need to go away. This will raise ALL taxes (ie. broaden the base) back up to Clinton levels. At their worst, Clinton levels brought in 17.5% of GDP in tax revenue. That would give us, today, $2.7T in revenue, $400B off our deficit. Once we were back to 5% unemployment, we could get 19% of GDP, which would be $2.945T, and out deficit is almost cut in half. Just by allowing Bush Rates to go away.

Next, capital gains taxes are taxed as income. Always. Period. This has been estimated to bring in $100B a year in revenue.

Then, businesses, since they're people, need to pay their fair share. Effective rates for companies are around 1% of GDP. This is 1/6 what it was in the 50s. Raise rates back to the level of the 1950s. This would give us some $700B more a year in revenue and the deficit is gone.

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

It goes to programs that help the largest number of citizens.

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

History has not shown that. Also, we're talking about levels from the Clinton Era and from the 1950s. Is there anyone who thinks those times were not good?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

Asked and answered. This plan would balance the budget and would be shared by a large number of people.

While I see that you gave it a good and honest shot I think you lack the ability to see what the Bush era tax cuts did. The cuts created a boom, the spending caused a recession/depression.

If you get rid of the Bush era tax cuts you will not get projected amounts of revenue. Under Clinton times were different, we had 2 bubbles and spending was still pretty low compared to today. Clinton tax rates also came with growing deficits and recessions, they raided SS to make it look as if there was a projected surplus as we all should know by now.

Today we also have mass inflation on energy and food. Housing is still too high and that is mainly due to the poor economy and lack of jobs and loss of good paying jobs.

I’ll just stop here and leave it at you can’t compare the times under Clinton to today. Higher taxes right now would be devastating and you don’t actually want the Bush era tax cuts to go away, you want part of them to go away while you keep taxes lower for most people… meaning you’re numbers of revenue are inaccurate.

So whats the point =D

 

[Avorysuds]

Answer the questions.

How much should taxes go up for the rich?

How much revenue will it bring in?

Where does *all* of that revenue go?

Will there be any economic fallout due to these higher taxes as history has shown since the begging of taxing people?

What is the annual deficit after these taxes are collected and the money is spent?

The rich should pay at least the same percentage as the middle class - all taxes combined. Got a problem with that, shithead? The rich should pay an additional 10% of their income, based on their ability to pay and their ability to shield income from being counted as income. Got a problem with that, shithead?

It'll bring in more revenue. I'm not the absolute f-ing moron you are who reasons if that if it doesn't raise enough to close the deficit then it shouldn't be done.

Grats, at 10% more on the top 1% you collected about 35 billion a year... Job well done, you saved America. Only 1,500 billion-ish to go.

http://new-cdn.financialsamurai.com.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/toptaxes.jpg

Now under you the top 1% pay a 10x higher tax rate than the bottom 50%, 2 1/2x more than the 50% range, 2x more than the 25% range, and well, are just paying far more than any othr group.