People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit by a 2-to-1 Margin

[Article 15]

So who is stopping you?

Who is stopping you?

You bitch about the deficit more than most.

There is nothing to stop me from. I haven't been calling for other people's taxes to be raised to plug it. It's not necessary to raise taxes on anyone.

Again, only in a Libertarian Lala Land.

 

[GWV5903]

Maybe instead of raising taxes, we should start collecting taxes from the nearly 50% of people who pay no taxes at all. That would be a good start on the problem.

I sure do get tired of reading this phony figure. It's just BS. It is impossible to live in this country and not pay taxes. Have a phone? you pay a tax. Have a car? You pay a ton of taxes. We pay taxes on just about everything. So I say bull on that figure of 50% don't pay taxes.

Now, if you are actually saying that 50% don't pay income tax, that might be a little bit truer.

But are you aware that of that 50% over half don't earn enough to pay taxes. You really want to go after the family that is trying to live on $20,000 a year while standing firm on no taxes for people earning over $250,000? That sure sounds crazy to me. Plus a ton of people who get SS no longer pay income taxes. Shall we go after them too?

Atlanta Opinion *| ajc.com

I don't want to speak for BBD, but I am pretty sure he means income taxes, and BTW there are a large number of people receiving tax refunds for more than they pay in, that has got to stop....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Who is stopping you?

You bitch about the deficit more than most.

There is nothing to stop me from. I haven't been calling for other people's taxes to be raised to plug it. It's not necessary to raise taxes on anyone.

Again, only in a Libertarian Lala Land.

Explain.

 

[Dr.House]

No I'm just saying if you do not think you are paying enough to the Federal Government, I'm sure they take donations.

They probably do, but the sad part is that no matter how high my salary is it cannot cure the debt crisis. If it could, I would gladly donate it.

So you aren't giving anything back to the government... Your lowering of your discretionary spending doesn't mean you're doing more to help... It just means you are holding on to more of your cash and cutting spending without raising your debt...

That is very wise, but doesn't mean you're giving back to the government...

 

[Stephanie]

omg, what would we do with all them poor laid off Guberment employees? And ALL them over reaching GUBERMENT agencies the we people are just so stupid we CAN'T CAN'T live without them.

I guess laid off Guberment employees will go on the damn UNEMPLOYMENT LIST like the other 9.2% of the American people.

I work for a a school and there is a CHANCE I could be laid off anytime depending on their budgets. what is so friggen hard to understand about that. why is it some people BELIEVE having a Guberment job means you have ONE FOR LIFE
sheesh.

 

[Article 15]

There is nothing to stop me from. I haven't been calling for other people's taxes to be raised to plug it. It's not necessary to raise taxes on anyone.

Again, only in a Libertarian Lala Land.

Explain.

2 to fucking 1 Americans are for tax increases.

Fin.

 

[Susan45]

I'll wager that those in favor of tax increases are in favor of tax increases on people other than themselves....

Not me. I have no problem giving back. I was born in the US, and thanks to incredible luck and hard work I have never wanted for anything. I'm perfectly happy giving up discretionary spending and I think everyone else should be too in these tough times.

Give up your Starbucks/Dunkin' Donuts.

It really isn't that hard.

Nor I. Get rid of the Bush Tax cuts. For everyone.

They were galactically stupid to begin with.

Yes they were. I happen to run across an interesting article from 2004.

Bush quietly signs corporate tax-cut bill - Business - Stocks & economy - msnbc.com

Enjoy.

 

[Article 15]

You don't live in reality, Taz.

You're an ideolouge, living in an ideologue world.

 

[del]

Stephanie is getting more partisan as time goes by. She even changed her AV. I might change mine to a Cantor AV

i'll alert the media

 

[Stephanie]

Again, only in a Libertarian Lala Land.

Explain.

2 to fucking 1 Americans are for tax increases.

Fin.

I find that hard to believe, but seeing you people cheer for it is sad..

 

[Susan45]

omg, what would we do with all them poor laid off Guberment employees? And ALL them over reaching GUBERMENT agencies the we people are just so stupid we CAN'T CAN'T live without them.

I guess laid off Guberment employees will go on the damn UNEMPLOYMENT LIST like the other 9.2% of the American people.

I work for a a school and there is a CHANCE I could be laid off anytime depending on their budgets. what is so friggen hard to understand about that. why is it some people BELIEVE having a Guberment job means you have ONE FOR LIFE
sheesh.

Are you talking baby talk because you work at a school? That seems very strange to me.

I guess you just haven't given it much thought. But if they make the budget cuts that you and some others seem to think they must, then there won't be any unemployment...for you or anyone.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To see the polls, click the link.

People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit by a 2-to-1 Margin | Capital Gains and Games

And from Quinnipiac

National (US) Poll * July 14, 2011 * President Is Best Of The Worst - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

When did you start posting blatantly partisan links?

Those polls show that people are willing to accept higher taxes as a part of reducing the deficit. They also show that people want that deficit reduction to be mostly about cutting spending, and that only 20% or so actually support using only taxes to reduce the deficit. Why does your site fail to mention any of that?

Wait a sec. Did I miss something? Have I been following this wrongly? Have the MSM totally screwed the pooch? Have the House Republicans saying that they would be willing to increase taxes all along?

Because the answer to your question is this isn't about "mostly." It's about "all." The House Republicans want it all to be about spending cuts. Not "mostly."

So, yeah, there's a partisan problem alright, just not at that the site, given that the post was written by a Republican economist who served in the Reagan administration.

Not true.

The Tea Party has repeatedly stated that they would accept tax increases only if it is accompanied by a Balanced Budget Amendment and significant cuts in spending. The Democrats will not vote for a spending cut, or a BBA. Put this together and you end up with an incontrovertible fact, nothing currently on the table will pass the House.

Please explain to me why the refusal of either side to budge is somehow solely the fault of the side you disagree with.

You are right there is a partisan problem, but laying the blame only on one side is falling into the partisan trap yourself.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Try teh question: DO you support raising taxes on fat old rich guys with private airplanes so Medicare can pay for Grandma's life saving surgery.
I'll bet the results will be even higher.

The Republican base is engaging in confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.[Note 1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way. The biases appear in particular for emotionally significant issues and for established beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position.

.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I love it when people talk about confirmation bias and completely miss the point.

You are only seeing what is supporting your position, and are deliberately selecting the data that supports it.

The Democrats are opposed to spending cuts of any type, and Pelosi has flatly said she will vote against them. If you look at your numbers again you will see that that position is actually even further off base, even among Democrats, than the Republicans who are opposing all tax hikes. Yet, for some reason, you are harping only on the Republicans who are refusing to give, and not talking about the Democrats. Both sides need to give for a deal to pass, and Boehner keeps telling Obama, and the press, that simple truth. Nothing out there will pass the House, including Obama's imaginary proposal for $4 trillion in cuts and $1 trillion in tax hikes.

 

[Stephanie]

omg, what would we do with all them poor laid off Guberment employees? And ALL them over reaching GUBERMENT agencies the we people are just so stupid we CAN'T CAN'T live without them.

I guess laid off Guberment employees will go on the damn UNEMPLOYMENT LIST like the other 9.2% of the American people.

I work for a a school and there is a CHANCE I could be laid off anytime depending on their budgets. what is so friggen hard to understand about that. why is it some people BELIEVE having a Guberment job means you have ONE FOR LIFE
sheesh.

Are you talking baby talk because you work at a school? That seems very strange to me.

I guess you just haven't given it much thought. But if they make the budget cuts that you and some others seem to think they must, then there won't be any unemployment...for you or anyone.

Are you always so condescending?
and you should go back and read your own post you think you're so smart. It makes NO SENSE.
now you are

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Except the deficit will not be reduced by higher taxes. Government will simply expand to use the new dollars. This is why reducing programs first is so important.

Thank you!

This is the issue with raising taxes. I could care less about how much the higher earners pay. But there's no point in raising taxes if the government is just going to spend that new revenue instead of paying down the debt with it. This is why I support cutting spending first, so my government proves to me that they're responsible enough to use new revenues wisely. After we cut all we can, then we can start taxing more to raise revenue.

Here's the deal though. Just what would you cut? Are you ready to do without the EPA? How about the CDC? Or FEMA? The federal government has been helping out state and local governments, that would have to end and we would all have to cough up more to support where we live.

And something I haven't seen much of is...if that happens and they start closing agencies, what are we supposed to do with all the unemployed people? Thousands and thousands more people will be out of work. And it looks like there aren't any private jobs on the horizon. You really think that all those people and their families can make it without a job, or unemployment benefits? What do we do about them?

We shouldn't make cuts because they will hurt.

Guess what, not making cuts will hurt worse. Do you want your children to go through what is happening in Greece and Portugal? Wouldn't you rather make hard choices now than to have worse ones forced on you in a few years?

 

[Flopper]

For the sake of argument, I'm going to presume that your stats are correct despite doubting them. Even if that many people supported raising taxes to fix the deficit, raising taxes wouldn't fix the deficit. It would merely slow the economy and we would see even less revenue than we have before

The poll says exactly what Obama said. The solution should be be a balanced approach with spending cuts and tax increases.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It appears that Republicans have walked away from a historic opportunity to reduce the deficit because of their obsessive insistance that not one penny come from higher revenues. Recent polls, however, suggest that the American people are not so obstinate and are more than willing to accept some increase in taxes to reduce the deficit. There is a high degree of consistency in every poll I could find on this topic. ...

To see the polls, click the link.

People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit by a 2-to-1 Margin | Capital Gains and Games

And from Quinnipiac

Voters will blame Republicans over Obama 48 - 34 percent if the debt limit is not raised;

National (US) Poll * July 14, 2011 * President Is Best Of The Worst - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

Yeah right....First question in poll.."Do you earn under $50k per year?"
Second question....."Are you receiving public assistance?"
If the person answered yes to these questions, the survey went forward. If not, the caller thanked the person for their participation
Look, anyone with a political agenda can commission a poll. They simply ask questions in such a was as to elicit a predetermined response.
Polls are for the uninformed and the easily led.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Most people support tax increases because in their real world if one has to choose between not feeding the children and not putting gas in the car, a third choice of increasing your income becomes the real solution.

who said anything about not being able to buy food or gas?
This is the kind of drivel weak minds produce under the guise of furthering a political agenda.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The poll says exactly what Obama said. The solution should be be a balanced approach with spending cuts and tax increases.

And Congress needs neither a poll nor Obama to know a balanced approach of tax increases and spending cuts is the only effective way to go.

 

[Susan45]

Thank you!

This is the issue with raising taxes. I could care less about how much the higher earners pay. But there's no point in raising taxes if the government is just going to spend that new revenue instead of paying down the debt with it. This is why I support cutting spending first, so my government proves to me that they're responsible enough to use new revenues wisely. After we cut all we can, then we can start taxing more to raise revenue.

Here's the deal though. Just what would you cut? Are you ready to do without the EPA? How about the CDC? Or FEMA? The federal government has been helping out state and local governments, that would have to end and we would all have to cough up more to support where we live.

And something I haven't seen much of is...if that happens and they start closing agencies, what are we supposed to do with all the unemployed people? Thousands and thousands more people will be out of work. And it looks like there aren't any private jobs on the horizon. You really think that all those people and their families can make it without a job, or unemployment benefits? What do we do about them?

We shouldn't make cuts because they will hurt.

Guess what, not making cuts will hurt worse. Do you want your children to go through what is happening in Greece and Portugal? Wouldn't you rather make hard choices now than to have worse ones forced on you in a few years?

Please don't misunderstand me, I am not against budget cuts. But I am for sensible budget cuts. If the right doesn't pass the debt ceiling bill, it could be worse then Greece or Portugal. There hasn't been one person I respect that says we shouldn't pass the debt ceiling. Even Reagan raised the debt ceiling 19 times.

In 1983, Reagan warned that the consequences of failing to raise the nation’s borrowing limit “are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate”:

FLASHBACK: In 1983, Reagan Warned Of ‘Incalculable Damage’ If Debt Ceiling Wasn’t Raised | ThinkProgress

IMO it has only been a little over 2 yrs. since Obama took office. He came in when the economy was really bottoming out. And now, some are trying to get him to make a decision that he feels is unadvised. And from what I've been reading, it's the first time in history that any president has been pushed to the wall they way the right is pushing Obama.

I watched an interview with Lawrence Summers yesterday. He said that the economy is moving, it's only growing at about 2% but that it was still good that it is growing. If they don't raise the debt ceiling it will stall. And he feels that would be a disaster.

Anyway, it's my long way of saying I really disagree that raising the debt ceiling would move us towards a Greece/Portugal emergency. And in fact not raising it would be much worse.