Obama pays less than a third on taxes

[Iriemon]

Yesterday I read that Clinton earned approx. $107 million since he left the oval office. So, the years after presidency seem to be the real pay-off.

He commands very high fees for speaking and made lots from his books.

 

[DavidS]

Since when is 35% approximately 40%?

You have deductions when you're that rich.

They made $2,656,902 gross income last year.

He had about $125,000 in deductions and paid 35% on about $2,450,000. He also paid about $80,000 in state income taxes. All Obama is going to do is re-raise the upper tax bracket to 39.6%. So instead of paying $855,323, he would pay $970,200. As you can tell, that really won't hurt him. Instead of having $1.8 million, he'll have about $1.65 million left. He, as well as all of the other millionaires out there, should be fine.

The people that would be the most affected by this tax increase are those at the bottom of the highest tax bracket. If I make $400,000, I pay $140,000 in taxes. I say the tax rate be lowered for everyone making below $750,000 - $164,000 to somewhere in the low 20s (people who often make this amount of money are usually small business CEOs and mid-level executives) and raise it 39.6% for the people making above $750,000.

 

[Yurt]

No he ran up a freaking trillion in debt. Whose gonna pay that? Is that what Obama should do? Be like Bush and run up trillions in debt to keep taxes low? Did Bush say he'd raise taxes? No! He put the nation $5 trillion more in debt! What kind of example is that?

That attitude is why the the freaking Govt is $11 trillion in debt! Just shut up, don't raise taxes, and run up the debt. We'll bitch about spending.

Eventually. No, not this year.

Eventually. No, not this year.



Now you tell me.

Now I have a question for you. Is maximizing your personal wealth more important than the nation's financial health? Given that Obama is not going to cut spending, would you rather the nation borrowed trillions more dollars, or increase taxes and lower the deficit?

i requested a yes or no answer. why did you not give one?

Because I can't give an accurate yes or no answer to an ambiguous question. For example, in your last question, did you mean this year or eventually?

But with that proviso, and the proviso you aren't letting me explain, I'll answer no, I don't know, I don't know.

No are you going to answer my question?

Given that Obama is not going to cut spending, would you rather the nation borrowed trillions more dollars, or increase taxes and lower the deficit?

ambiguous means it is capable of one or more different interpretations....why don't you tell us how these questions are ambiguous:

1. did bush tell people that they need to pay more taxes for the war?

-- quite clear, yes or no, any year will do

2. did obama tell people that the rich (himself) need to pay more taxes?

-- quite clear, yes or no, any year will do. "eventually" is a red herring....you know i am talking about NOW and the PAST. your little games don't impress anyone.

3. did obama tell people that bush's tax cuts were bad and need to be repealed?

-- quite clear, yes or no, any year will do. "eventually" is a red herring....you know i am talking about NOW and the PAST. your little games don't impress anyone.

simple yes or no

got it.....

and btw, you called me a hypocrite, why don't you prove how i have been hypocritical.

fact is, you have admitted obama is a hypocrite on taxes and you love him so much you can't even see it. i even pointed it out to you....but your partisan blindness doesn't allow you to see it.