The Myth of only raising taxes on those making over $250,000

[Skeptik]

Does anyone seriously believe that either McCain or Obama is going to be able to actually cut taxes?

The great big elephant in the room is that pesky little half trillion dollar deficit, along with the actual 477 billion deficit from last year, and that 10 trillion debt that has already outrun the ability of the national debt clock to show all of the digits.

The candidates' talk about cutting taxes is simply hot air and fluff, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.

The Congress will make points by voting down the tax and the spending proposals of which ever one is elected, thus appearing to be fiscally conservative. Their collective voter approval rating could even climb out of the single digits, if they are successful.

Both candidates know that they can neither cut taxes nor increase spending in the current economic climate. Arguing over whose tax cuts are best is simply posturing, and hoping that the electorate is too stupid to catch on.

Of course, anyone telling the truth, which is that some serious belt tightening and tax increases will be necessary to bring fiscal sanity back to the government after eight years of profligate spending and tax cuts would never be elected.

 

[Care4all]

If it helps keep my money out of your pocket, my job is done

HOW about getting more of YOUR OWN TAX MONEY back? Are you against that too? Don't YOU think you can do a better job with it than the government?

care

 

[Gunny]

Link it....

Just Google Bill Clinton.

 

[Gunny]

I am going to keep posting this until it sinks in,

Bush has left us with no feasible option but to raise taxes

So, here is a little exercise for all of you out there that think we can balance the federal budget through spending cuts and can avoid tax increases. I pulled these figures from Wikipedia for the 2008 Federal Budget:

$608 billion - Social Security
$386 billion - Medicare
$209 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion - Interest on National Debt
$481.4 billion- United States Department of Defense
$145.2 billion- Global War on Terror
$69.3 billion - Health and Human Services
$56.0 billion - United States Department of Education
$39.4 billion - United States Department of Veterans Affairs
$35.2 billion - US Department of Housing and Urban Development
$35.0 billion - State and Other International Programs
$34.3 billion - Department of Homeland Security
$24.3 billion - Energy
$20.2 billion - Department of Justice
$20.2 billion - Department of Agriculture
$17.3 billion - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$12.1 billion - Department of Transportation
$12.1 billion - Department of Treasury
$10.6 billion - United States Department of the Interior
$10.6 billion - United States Department of Labor

For FY 2008 our estimated deficit will be $455 billion and our current national debt is $10.2 Trillion.

Easy question, what do you cut from the above to get $455 billion?

You start but cutting the size of that fat pig you call a government and the bureaucracy that supports it in half. Then you actualy put checks and balances in place that regulate those that suck off it to better identify deadbeats that need to get off their asses and get a job.

Then you get some real world into these subcommittees to investigate committees that investigate committees to see if men DO prefer boxers to briefs.

There are plenty of places to cut money without reaching into our pockets. People like you just think you're so damned smart and have all the answers the obvious flies right over your head.

 

[Gunny]

Aww how cute. Not only is someone pulling shit out of their ass with a splintered wooden rod, but they also used my name and new avatar in their signature.

Truly, I'm honored. *takes a bow*

Feel free to prove your inability to respond.

 

[rayboyusmc]

Which departments benefit the slothful protion of the population that’s too lazy to get off their butts and find work, let’s start there.

And you will be the one to determine who is slothful and who got fucked by a catastrophic illness etc?

You do realize that the US has been involved in a war on Terror over the past seven years and the economy is in the toilet, right?

No, we have been involved in a war in Iraq that is not the war on Terror. Had we finished our job in Afghanistan, we wouldn't be spending that money. We could have killed Saddam for a lot less and still had a functioning country.

lljlkj

 

[wvjoereck]

I admit that some of those cut are just for lulz, but then again, fuck it--all the services can go, and perhaps we can keep some of the budgets for some of those agencies for the constutionally mandated items they are tasked with--the rest of it goes.

As for these government workers, there's plenty of work in the private sector.

You don't see that as a problem?

All of those workers extort taxes.

I thought I covered that with cutting funding to the WOT(TM).

Yeah, you should keep your money; they've already fucked off with the money you've sent them--you won't get that back.

If they all leave, I'm going to miss my BOMB and SPEND buddies in Washington DC. It looks like we ran out of money.

I just hope my BOMB and Spend buddies that are left in DC and just starting to fighting the new SOCIALIST stuff (that they claim exist) will leave my roads, education, fire departments, police departments, homeland security, military, sports facilities, social security, Medicare, water, sewer , rural electric, and public transportation alone. I don't want these crazy programs stopped unless they say they are tied to socialism. Imagine taking my money and using it for such foolishness when we could be spending 10 billion a month in Iraq.

Yup.....I'm sure goin to miss my Bombin buddies in DC. Guess I'll have to watch Fox news and Listen to Talk Radio for a while and hope we can survive.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

I am going to keep posting this until it sinks in,

Bush has left us with no feasible option but to raise taxes

So, here is a little exercise for all of you out there that think we can balance the federal budget through spending cuts and can avoid tax increases. I pulled these figures from Wikipedia for the 2008 Federal Budget:

$608 billion - Social Security
$386 billion - Medicare
$209 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion - Interest on National Debt
$481.4 billion- United States Department of Defense
$145.2 billion- Global War on Terror
$69.3 billion - Health and Human Services
$56.0 billion - United States Department of Education
$39.4 billion - United States Department of Veterans Affairs
$35.2 billion - US Department of Housing and Urban Development
$35.0 billion - State and Other International Programs
$34.3 billion - Department of Homeland Security
$24.3 billion - Energy
$20.2 billion - Department of Justice
$20.2 billion - Department of Agriculture
$17.3 billion - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$12.1 billion - Department of Transportation
$12.1 billion - Department of Treasury
$10.6 billion - United States Department of the Interior
$10.6 billion - United States Department of Labor

For FY 2008 our estimated deficit will be $455 billion and our current national debt is $10.2 Trillion.

Easy question, what do you cut from the above to get $455 billion?

$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$145.2 billion- Global War on Terror
$69.3 billion - Health and Human Services
$56.0 billion - United States Department of Education
$35.2 billion - US Department of Housing and Urban Development
$34.3 billion - Department of Homeland Security
$24.3 billion - Energy
$20.2 billion - Department of Agriculture
$17.3 billion - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$12.1 billion - Department of Transportation
$10.6 billion - United States Department of the Interior
$10.6 billion - United States Department of Labor
$7 billion - Commerce Department

$766.1 billion

No deficit and room for a $311 billion tax cut. We haven't even touched the ripe targets of the military, SS, and medicare/medicaid.

 

[xsited1]

Does anyone seriously believe that either McCain or Obama is going to be able to actually cut taxes?

Of course they can cut taxes if they reduce the size of government. However, they are both big-government politicians so it's a moot point.

 

[Toro]

Let me ask you a question, how much are you willing to pay keep terrorists on foreign soil rather than having them parade around in the United States, killing American’s and blowing-up buildings? Exactly what’s your cap on that? I’d really like to know.

That's a good question.

And the answer - if you have been a supporter of Bush and the GOP Congress - is $0! Why? Because you cut taxes! You weren't willing to fund your own War on Terror.

Instead, you choose to increase the taxes on your children - which is what a deficit is - for both the cost of the war and the tens of billions of dollars in interest that will have to be paid.

Tax-your-children-and-spend Republicans.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Let me ask you a question, how much are you willing to pay keep terrorists on foreign soil rather than having them parade around in the United States, killing American’s and blowing-up buildings? Exactly what’s your cap on that? I’d really like to know.

I'm not willing to pay very much at all.

Fortunately, that's not necessary. Muslim nations do not have much in the way of navies. They cannot mount a successful invasion of america.

No, it's very easy to deter muslim terrorism. The way you do that is by not letting them into america in the first place. This was very easy, affordable, and effective--until 1965, when the immigration law was changed.

I realize this is politically incorrect, but if muslims are really that outrageously dangerous, then it is simply the most humane thing to do. Stay out of the middle east and stop all muslim immigration. Vastly cheaper, vastly more effective, and vastly fewer dead muslims compared to our Iraq fiasco. (Of course, before we get to such a radical point, it might be worth it to let our airline pilots carry tazers).

Invade the world, invite the world. No thanks.

 

[Agnapostate]

And when he came to tax me, there was no income to tax for I was unemployed and there was no one left to support me.

Learn it.

Know it.

Because, if Obama wins this election you will: Live it.

Are you not familiar with the concept of progressive taxation, and its moral justifiability because of a fewer number of tax recipients and a decreasing rate of marginal utility as the upper classes are reached?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Not even to get into the lack of merit in those cuts, just how many jobs are contained in those agencies?

You do realize that the government is our largest employer, right? All of those workers pay taxes.

Let me get this straight. Gov't employees pay taxes but our taxes pay gov't employees. Isn't that like taking a cash advance on one credit card to pay another???

Every tax dollar used for government jobs is a dollar that cannot be used for real job creation or consumption in the private sector. Every government job we eliminate will result in a net increase of tax revenue because taxes from non government jobs are actually paid from activities that contribute to GDP where taxes from government employees are merely dollars already collected as taxes and run through the system twice. I will go as far as to say that a tax dollar from a government employee is worth less than a tax dollar from the private sector because we are actually spending twice as much to collect the same dollar.

Want to cut expenses? Get out of Iraq.

And social security is our money.

Yes we should get out of Iraq but only when doing so will not leave a worse situation than when Saddam was in power. There are plenty of other places to cut as well.

Yes SS is our money which is exactly why I don't want the government's greedy paws on it.

 

[editec]

The first $100,000 our people are making in IRAQ is NOT TAXED, folks.

You did all know that, right?

 

[NOBama]

That's a good question.

And the answer - if you have been a supporter of Bush and the GOP Congress - is $0! Why? Because you cut taxes! You weren't willing to fund your own War on Terror.

Instead, you choose to increase the taxes on your children - which is what a deficit is - for both the cost of the war and the tens of billions of dollars in interest that will have to be paid.

Tax-your-children-and-spend Republicans.

What are you suggesting, that we pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, shut down all off shore US military bases and embassies, ban all imports/exports, shut down the UN, chuck every foreign embassy out off US soil, and build a great wall around US borders.

Will that make the US safe enough for your kids? I don’t believe it will or that a scenario which includes any of the above would be feasible.

When it comes to maintaining the freedom and safety of this country, I don't have a problem paying higher taxes, even if it means supporting a war effort, neither should anybody else, and if it does they should pack up and leave. What I do have a problem with is this Robin Hood tax plan. Not one red cent of this proposed tax increase will be applied to the deficit or do anything to help us get out of the financial crisis we’re facing.

I’m no more content with the deficit than any other reasonable tax paying citizen. I believe going into Iraq the way we did was wrong, and to this day, I believe it should have been a covert operation. I remember telling my wife the day Bush announced the invasion of Iraq that: The son of a bitch is going after Hussein to avenge the assassination attempt on his father’s life. Yes, that's harsh and probably wrong, but it was literally the first thought that came to mind upon hearing that news.

Unfortunately for US, and again; in my opinion, once Bush got his trophy he realized that it was too late to get out. He didn’t count on the ramifications of taking Hussein out and apparently only a few in his cabinet did. I’ll end my rant about the war in Iraq with one more observation: Personally, I think that’s why Powell walked.

Now, let me get back to the subject matter of my thread which I had stopped following once it was derailed.

In my opinion, neither of the tax plans of either of the buffoons who are about to inherit the White House is going to address our real problem which is: The balance of wealth in America has become so skewed that our society, as a whole, is in jeopardy. Furthermore, I speculate that throwing more money at welfare programs or trying to educate the poorest of America is exactly the wrong approach to solving the problem. You see, I come from the poorest of America and I struggled to attain every asset I own. Thus, I don’t believe being poor equates to being hopelessly stupid.

Call me a radical if you like, but I believe we need to create a welfare program to educate America’s wealthiest, to teach them that it’s their responsibility to ensure money remains in circulation amongst the masses, that paying the highest possible wage and charging the least possible amount for goods and services is not going to deplete their personal piggy banks while they continue to make a reasonable profit, but rather it will steadily nurture their accounts by addressing social issues including poverty and crime, as well as increase productivity and the quality of life; for everybody, including them. We need to teach them that life is not about obtaining the most marbles but rather that everybody who’s willing to participate in the game has enough marbles to play.

For Christ’s sake, how much money is enough? Can the Gates’ or Buffets’, or Allens’ or Waltons’, or any of the other 396 of America’s wealthiest families ever utilize all their wealth? Personally, I don’t believe they an.

No, I’m afraid we continue to target the wrong audience with our welfare and the majority of our education programs, in the same manner that we continue to elect millionaires, the smallest minority of our population, to represent the poorest majority of our population. Until we collectively recognize this problem as self evident and take action to change it, I believe we’ll continue down the selfish path of the few, at the devastating expense of the many.

The real challenge lies not in the legislation of wealth, but in educating those who have it in the understanding and management of it. If or until we come together as a people and recognize that and do something about it, regardless of race, sex, or religion, I don’t believe the Change We Need will never come.

Just as this post started everything herein is my opinion. If you disagree with it, be all means; share your own solution with us rather than trying to discredit mine.



Another edit… Just so it’s clear and this thread isn’t discredited by some left wingnut as plagiarism, I found the original post of this thread on one of those knucklehead extreme right wing websites while searching for something entirely different. The reason I didn’t link it back to that site was to avoid giving the left wingnuts that troll is board an opportunity to discredit the post based on where it came from because: I believe every word of the initial post and I adopted it as my own – with some modifications.

 

[jreeves]

I am going to keep posting this until it sinks in,

Bush has left us with no feasible option but to raise taxes

So, here is a little exercise for all of you out there that think we can balance the federal budget through spending cuts and can avoid tax increases. I pulled these figures from Wikipedia for the 2008 Federal Budget:

$608 billion - Social Security
$386 billion - Medicare
$209 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$261 billion - Interest on National Debt
$481.4 billion- United States Department of Defense
$145.2 billion- Global War on Terror
$69.3 billion - Health and Human Services
$56.0 billion - United States Department of Education
$39.4 billion - United States Department of Veterans Affairs
$35.2 billion - US Department of Housing and Urban Development
$35.0 billion - State and Other International Programs
$34.3 billion - Department of Homeland Security
$24.3 billion - Energy
$20.2 billion - Department of Justice
$20.2 billion - Department of Agriculture
$17.3 billion - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$12.1 billion - Department of Transportation
$12.1 billion - Department of Treasury
$10.6 billion - United States Department of the Interior
$10.6 billion - United States Department of Labor

For FY 2008 our estimated deficit will be $455 billion and our current national debt is $10.2 Trillion.

Easy question, what do you cut from the above to get $455 billion?

You are aware the national debt has exploded while the Democrats have held the checkbook correct? We have the largest annual national debt in history under Democrat Congressional control....

The President doesn't control spending Congress does.

 

[NOBama]

You are aware the national debt has exploded while the Democrats have held the checkbook correct? We have the largest annual national debt in history under Democrat Congressional control....

The President doesn't control spending Congress does.

In October 2008, Congress raised the debt limit to $11.315 trillion.

Source

 

[Care4all]

In October 2008, Congress raised the debt limit to $11.315 trillion.

Source

what does everyone expect the budget to look like with stimulus packages and bailouts and our War spending is not in the budget but outside of it?

Dems have been in control since january of 2007, and were put on the path of deficits and debt as far as the eye can see...

I can't see a reduction in our deficit for quite a while because of this track we've been put on by THIS administration's policies and his congresses and also because of the recession bringing in even less in taxes with fewer jobs, but it will eventually come, if we are smarter in what we do and what we spend money on...God willing....

then again...it could also be our destiny to financially fall.... we are teeter tottering at this point and it could be either....stay tuned!

care

 

[jreeves]

what does everyone expect the budget to look like with stimulus packages and bailouts and our War spending is not in the budget but outside of it?

Dems have been in control since january of 2007, and were put on the path of deficits and debt as far as the eye can see...

I can't see a reduction in our deficit for quite a while because of this track we've been put on by THIS administration's policies and his congresses and also because of the recession bringing in even less in taxes with fewer jobs, but it will eventually come, if we are smarter in what we do and what we spend money on...God willing....

then again...it could also be our destiny to financially fall.... we are teeter tottering at this point and it could be either....stay tuned!

care

So it's not the Dems fault. Republicans put them on a path of spending that created huge deficits. Wasn't Obama in the Democratically controlled Congress, what happened to 'Change we can believe in'? Democrats have ballooned the annual budget, Republicans didn't hold a gun to their heads to make them spend money. They did that on their own, besides if they weren't wasting time and money on this crap.
IPI General Opinions - Editorial - Is This a Do-Nothing Congress?
Dr. Merrill Matthews of the Institute for Policy Innovation says yes, and that may be the good news.

The Wall Street Journal says this Democratic-led Congress has passed 294 bills, fewer than any Congress in the last 20 years.

But it’s also passed the largest number of resolutions—1,932.

Resolutions are usually expressions of support for something and don’t do much harm—or good. Taxpayers for Common Sense has identified its top 10 list. They include:

Designating July as National Watermelon Month;
Recognizing the 70th anniversary of the Idaho Potato Commission;
And naming June 30 National Corvette Day.

Democrats want to postpone passing real laws because they think a new President Obama will sign whatever they pass.

If that happens, voters may find themselves making a few of their own resolutions.

Maybe just maybe, they could pass sound legislation that actually helped reduce the national deficit.

 

[Turboswede]

What are you suggesting, that we pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, shut down all off shore US military bases and embassies, ban all imports/exports, shut down the UN, chuck every foreign embassy out off US soil, and build a great wall around US borders.

Will that make the US safe enough for your kids? I don’t believe it will or that a scenario which includes any of the above would be feasible.

When it comes to maintaining the freedom and safety of this country, I don't have a problem paying higher taxes, even if it means supporting a war effort, neither should anybody else, and if it does they should pack up and leave. What I do have a problem with is this Robin Hood tax plan. Not one red cent of this proposed tax increase will be applied to the deficit or do anything to help us get out of the financial crisis we’re facing.

I’m no more content with the deficit than any other reasonable tax paying citizen. I believe going into Iraq the way we did was wrong, and to this day, I believe it should have been a covert operation. I remember telling my wife the day Bush announced the invasion of Iraq that: The son of a bitch is going after Hussein to avenge the assassination attempt on his father’s life. Yes, that's harsh and probably wrong, but it was literally the first thought that came to mind upon hearing that news.

Unfortunately for US, and again; in my opinion, once Bush got his trophy he realized that it was too late to get out. He didn’t count on the ramifications of taking Hussein out and apparently only a few in his cabinet did. I’ll end my rant about the war in Iraq with one more observation: Personally, I think that’s why Powell walked.

Now, let me get back to the subject matter of my thread which I had stopped following once it was derailed.

In my opinion, neither of the tax plans of either of the buffoons who are about to inherit the White House is going to address our real problem which is: The balance of wealth in America has become so skewed that our society, as a whole, is in jeopardy. Furthermore, I speculate that throwing more money at welfare programs or trying to educate the poorest of America is exactly the wrong approach to solving the problem. You see, I come from the poorest of America and I struggled to attain every asset I own. Thus, I don’t believe being poor equates to being hopelessly stupid.

Call me a radical if you like, but I believe we need to create a welfare program to educate America’s wealthiest, to teach them that it’s their responsibility to ensure money remains in circulation amongst the masses, that paying the highest possible wage and charging the least possible amount for goods and services is not going to deplete their personal piggy banks while they continue to make a reasonable profit, but rather it will steadily nurture their accounts by addressing social issues including poverty and crime, as well as increase productivity and the quality of life; for everybody, including them. We need to teach them that life is not about obtaining the most marbles but rather that everybody who’s willing to participate in the game has enough marbles to play.

For Christ’s sake, how much money is enough? Can the Gates’ or Buffets’, or Allens’ or Waltons’, or any of the other 396 of America’s wealthiest families ever utilize all their wealth? Personally, I don’t believe they an.

No, I’m afraid we continue to target the wrong audience with our welfare and the majority of our education programs, in the same manner that we continue to elect millionaires, the smallest minority of our population, to represent the poorest majority of our population. Until we collectively recognize this problem as self evident and take action to change it, I believe we’ll continue down the selfish path of the few, at the devastating expense of the many.

The real challenge lies not in the legislation of wealth, but in educating those who have it in the understanding and management of it. If or until we come together as a people and recognize that and do something about it, regardless of race, sex, or religion, I don’t believe the Change We Need will never come.

Just as this post started everything herein is my opinion. If you disagree with it, be all means; share your own solution with us rather than trying to discredit mine.



Another edit… Just so it’s clear and this thread isn’t discredited by some left wingnut as plagiarism, I found the original post of this thread on one of those knucklehead extreme right wing websites while searching for something entirely different. The reason I didn’t link it back to that site was to avoid giving the left wingnuts that troll is board an opportunity to discredit the post based on where it came from because: I believe every word of the initial post and I adopted it as my own – with some modifications.

How about requiring that spending increases be tied to a way of paying for the expense, like issuing war bonds or instituting a war tax?