Why We Must Raise Taxes On The Rich:

[hortysir]

It's not an 'article', it's a blog.

I would love to see us adopted the 50% tax ,
everyone pays 50% of their wages to the government ,
and we get free collage , health care , and more . all of our services fire police , cover everything , no matter rich poor or middle class .

Move to the Netherlands, shit-stain

 

[ClosedCaption]

Okay, folks, if we want to stick it to rich people in order to deal with our budget deficits, how about we start with THESE rich people?

1) Agricultural subsidies that go to billionaire agricultural corporations, rather than small farmers. Why the hell are we paying agricultural subsidies, anyway?

2) "Green" and "alternative energy" subsidies to big corporations.

3) Government-subsidized insurance for expensive coastal resorts built too close to the ocean for private insurance companies to be willing to insure them.

Problem is, these are all "corporate welfare" programs implemented and favored by the left. So how about it, lefties? Wanna put your money where your "rich fatcat"-hating mouths are and start by skewering your own sacred cows?

The left loves these? I thought the rich loved these. Because all of that shit can go.

Now how about raising taxes AND cutting spending? huh? anyone on the right?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Now how about raising taxes AND cutting spending? huh? anyone on the right?

Taxes cannot be raised enough.
Military spending cannot be cut enough.
Entitlement spending must be slashed in order to meaningfully address the defict.

 

[sinister59]

how about instead of being a bitch and wanting to cut libs favorite subsidies we cut all corporate welfare , oil coal , any and all . let them make it by their own strength .
don't pay a farmer for not growing , offshore business tax,and more , tariffs .

pay for your own kids education .

 

[MikeK]

Elliot Spitzer? Midwest Democracy? Anything but Truth?
You should throw Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart and perhaps Russel Brand in the mix.

If you have what you believe are substantive arguments to dispute what your ad hominem comment attempts to degrade, how about presenting them. There is nothing productive or relevant about smart-ass commentary and a string of silly smileys.

 

[Spoonman]

It's not an 'article', it's a blog.

I would love to see us adopted the 50% tax ,
everyone pays 50% of their wages to the government ,
and we get free collage , health care , and more . all of our services fire police , cover everything , no matter rich poor or middle class .

Move to the Netherlands, shit-stain

she's a cool chic douche bag

 

[MikeK]

Ban the Entitlement Mindset!

What, specifically, do you mean by entitlements?

The entitlement mindset.
Where you beleive you are entitled to a standard of living, and that if you cannot provide it for yourself, you are entitled to have the government force others to provide it to you.

This is still very vague and evasive. Are you talking about Social Security? Medicare? What?

And specifically what is this "standard of living" you allude to -- and what category of Americans believe they are entitled to it?

If you can point to some specific category of undeserving slackers and freeloaders it's quite possible I and others here might agree with you.

 

[hortysir]

I would love to see us adopted the 50% tax ,
everyone pays 50% of their wages to the government ,
and we get free collage , health care , and more . all of our services fire police , cover everything , no matter rich poor or middle class .

Move to the Netherlands, shit-stain

she's a cool chic douche bag

Even cool chics are allowed to say stoopid shit once in a while.

I don't live in the Netherlands because I don't believe in giving my government half of everything I work for so they can take care of me.

I don't elect my government to care for me.

I can mange just fine without 'em, thanks.

 

[MikeK]

These are corporations, not people.
What do they have to do with raising taxes on the rich?

Who do you think are principal shareholders and managers of those corporations, the poor?

How does the tax rates on these businesses affect the tax rates on those individuals, and vice versa?
Your examples are unrelated to the topic.

The tax rate of these corporations affects their bottom line (assets) which is distributed via dividends, inflated salaries and bonuses to the principal shareholders and executives, many (most?) of whom inhabit the super-rich category.

We are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars in tax revenues which are evaded via sophisticated loopholes in our corrupted IRS code and reduced progressive rates.

 

[Spoonman]

Move to the Netherlands, shit-stain

she's a cool chic douche bag

Even cool chics are allowed to say stoopid shit once in a while.

I don't live in the Netherlands because I don't believe in giving my government half of everything I work for so they can take care of me.

I don't elect my government to care for me.

I can mange just fine without 'em, thanks.

ooops, i responded to the wrong post. that wasn't meant for you. I don't want government in my face either.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What, specifically, do you mean by entitlements?

The entitlement mindset.
Where you beleive you are entitled to a standard of living, and that if you cannot provide it for yourself, you are entitled to have the government force others to provide it to you.

This is still very vague and evasive. Are you talking about Social Security? Medicare? What?

Your response indicates a (possibly willful) failure to understand the obvious.
I cannot make this any simpler for you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Okay, folks, if we want to stick it to rich people in order to deal with our budget deficits, how about we start with THESE rich people?

1) Agricultural subsidies that go to billionaire agricultural corporations, rather than small farmers. Why the hell are we paying agricultural subsidies, anyway?

2) "Green" and "alternative energy" subsidies to big corporations.

3) Government-subsidized insurance for expensive coastal resorts built too close to the ocean for private insurance companies to be willing to insure them.

Problem is, these are all "corporate welfare" programs implemented and favored by the left. So how about it, lefties? Wanna put your money where your "rich fatcat"-hating mouths are and start by skewering your own sacred cows?

The left loves these? I thought the rich loved these. Because all of that shit can go.

Now how about raising taxes AND cutting spending? huh? anyone on the right?

When did "the left" and "the rich" become mutually exclusive, dummy?

Of COURSE rich people - and those who aspire to be - take advantage of whatever possibilities are available. But it's not the right that wants to spend tax dollars on "green businesses", for example.

How about we cut our insane, bloated spending FIRST, and THEN talk about raising taxes? Prove to me that we NEED to raise taxes.

 

[sinister59]

flat tax no deferments , pay the same percentage as the rich or poor same across the board no deductions .

individual and corporate

 

[georgephillip]

what percentage of national income were the richest 1% appropriating?

appropriating, what a moron

"The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live.

"Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn.

"Too late."

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% | Society | Vanity Fair

Yes, the revolution will come comrade, we will in our greed take from the rich. Wait, er, we will take from the rich because they are greedy and we want their money. No wait, what I mean is...

What you really mean, Comrade, is you're a brainwashed, ignorant slave.

appropriate: "To take to one's self in exclusion of others; to claim or use as by an exclusive right; as, 'let no man appropriate the use of a common benefit.'"

When less than 1% of Americans increase their share of national wealth by the theft of approximately $17 billion in wages, savings and earnings of productive Americans, revolution is the solution.Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System | Common Dreams

 

[Bern80]

What, specifically, do you mean by entitlements?

The entitlement mindset.
Where you beleive you are entitled to a standard of living, and that if you cannot provide it for yourself, you are entitled to have the government force others to provide it to you.

This is still very vague and evasive. Are you talking about Social Security? Medicare? What?

And specifically what is this "standard of living" you allude to -- and what category of Americans believe they are entitled to it?

If you can point to some specific category of undeserving slackers and freeloaders it's quite possible I and others here might agree with you.

Shouldn't we just start with you? You're the one that titled the thread Why the rich should pay more taxes. If you're suggesting there is not significant group of people that feels entitled to a certain basic standard of living or certain entitlements, it makes one wonder why the rich really need to pay more in taxes. If you're suggesting there is no group of people that thinks it's owed these entitlements, what exactly is it you need the rich to pay more for?

 

[Trajan]

I have said it before and will say so again, they can go ahead and raise taxes on me if they get serious about cutting spending.I'll do my part but their whoring has got to stop and I mean corp. loopholes, spending ahead of pop. growth and inflation the lot of it, its called living within ones means.

here;

from a wapo Samuelson article today;


Few Americans realize the extent of their dependency. The Census Bureau reports that in 2009 almost half (46.2 percent) of the 300 million Americans received at least one federal benefit: 46.5 million, Social Security; 42.6 million, Medicare; 42.4 million, Medicaid; 36.1 million, food stamps; 3.2 million, veterans’ benefits; 12.4 million, housing subsidies. The census list doesn’t include tax breaks. Counting those, perhaps three-quarters or more of Americans receive some sizable government benefit. For example, about 22 percent of taxpayers benefit from the home mortgage interest deduction and 43 percent from the preferential treatment of employer-provided health insurance, says the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

Big government on the brink - The Washington Post

now, in 1960 you know what that figure was, as to what % of the pop. was on some type of sppt.? 14%.........now, when Kennedy decided to start ratcheting down taxes and it continued over the decades we, did not live within the means we dictated, we spent ahead always looking away from tomorrow and just to today.

Now, that we are strangling in all of the liabilities we created because we ignored our own tax policy, the answer is; ratchet taxes back up, as if this is the answer?

No, its not, but I am willing to help, stop the spending first, or its no dice, I don't trust them and what I just described is exactly why.

In 1960 when 14% of Americans received at least one federal benefit compared to today's rate of 46.2% what percentage of national income were the richest 1% appropriating?

Twenty-five years ago the figure was 12% for income and 33% for national wealth. Today, those who buy and sell elected Republicans AND Democrats the same way you and I buy newspapers "earn" nearly a quarter of all national income and control 40% of national wealth.

Do you trust those "Americans" who have increased their share of national wealth by nearly two percentage points over the last two years to stop funding the campaigns of millionaire politicians?

Is it likely that "self-interest properly understood" will ever be understood by those who increased their personal wealth during the same two year span that saw millions of their countrymen lose their jobs, homes, retirements and savings?

"In recent weeks we have watched people taking to the streets by the millions to protest political, economic, and social conditions in the oppressive societies they inhabit.

Governments have been toppled in Egypt and Tunisia.

"Protests have erupted in Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain. The ruling families elsewhere in the region look on nervously from their air-conditioned penthouses—will they be next?...

"The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live.

"Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn.

"Too late."

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% | Society | Vanity Fair

and this makes little difference, read what I write don't and answer that please, don't quote me and post a strawman ala class warfare, it gets tired and IS tired.

 

[georgephillip]

Now how about raising taxes AND cutting spending? huh? anyone on the right?

Taxes cannot be raised enough.
Military spending cannot be cut enough.
Entitlement spending must be slashed in order to meaningfully address the defict.

If it's true the US military/security budget consisting of the Pentagon, CIA and Homeland Security totals $1.1 trillion, it's nearly exactly the deficit Obama forecasts for fiscal 2012.

"This massive deficit spending serves only one purpose--the enrichment of the private companies that serve the military/security complex.

"These companies, along with those on Wall Street, are who elect the US government."

No. I'm not saying it's a good idea to eliminate the Pentagon; however, an audit or two might prove useful.

It would also be useful to tax the richest 10,000 Americans at the same rates they paid in the 1970s instead of their current 15% - 20% obligations.

Major corporations pay taxes at a rate less than Warren Buffett when they bother paying any taxes at all. If Boeing, GE, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and their ilk payed taxes at the same rate as Buffett claims to pay, the deficit would vanish.

Paul Craig Roberts: A Tool for Class War

 

[Againsheila]

Why must we raise taxes on the rich? Um, because they're the ones with the money??

 

[MikeK]

Shouldn't we just start with you? You're the one that titled the thread Why the rich should pay more taxes. If you're suggesting there is not significant group of people that feels entitled to a certain basic standard of living or certain entitlements, it makes one wonder why the rich really need to pay more in taxes. If you're suggesting there is no group of people that thinks it's owed these entitlements, what exactly is it you need the rich to pay more for?

For openers, how about commencing repair of our crumbling infrastructure and paying off our phenomenal national debt?

 

[sinister59]

national sails tax , if you spend it the4 feds get a cut ,
hows that for tax the rich ?
on top of a flat tax everyone pays the same percentage .