81% agree, raise taxes

[BolshevikHunter]

Well we see what we have here, it's a right wing message board as it should be 4 to 1 to raise taxes on the very rich, but 9-1 against on this site, gee I wonder why they know so much about Fox on here, LOL what a joke.

this is a "rightwing" messageboard?
REALLY?>?????

Just one more example brother.

~BH

 

[kaz]

Democracy is tyranny of the majority. In a free country, we are all citizens, we all share responsibility and all should bear the cost. The rich already pay far more then their share of taxes by every measure. When one in 20 people pay one and a half times what the other 19 pay, as is the case now, we are not equal men, we are men and leaches.

Grow up and stop advocating dumping your problems on a small set of the population.

You make it sound so awful to be rich. Sorry, but I can't feel sorry for the wealthy when wealth distribution itself is so skewed.

http://jec.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=91975589-257c-403b-8093-8f3b584a088c

The JEC report found:

In the past three decades, the share of income going to the wealthiest 10 percent of households has increased significantly, from 34.6 percent in 1980 to 48.2 percent in 2008.

Annual income for middle class Americans – those in the middle income quintile – increased by more than $6,700 during the Clinton Administration. During the eight years of the Bush Administration, this middle quintile saw their annual incomes fall by more than $2,600.

Americans across all five income quintiles saw income gains during the Clinton Administration, while, by contrast, incomes fell for each quintile during the Bush Administration.

The increase in marginal tax rates for the wealthiest one percent of households during the Clinton Administration did not lower these households’ income. Real income of the top 1 percent grew at an average annual rate of 10.3 percent during the Clinton years.

From 1948 to 2005, incomes for Americans in the 60th percentile grew at an average of 2.5 percent under Democratic Presidents, compared to an average growth rate of just 1.1 percent under Republicans.

This has nothing to do with my point. Freedom means the freedom to make what you want to happen happen. Freedom is inseparable with personal accountability. No matter how much you hate rich bastards who have more then you do and you can back it up with statistics that justify it in your mind, you are not free when you send them the bills for what you think is important. The choice to be a slave doesn't make you not a slave.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Let's start by taxing imports more. Companies over seas should have to pay more to get into our market. I think just about everybody can agree that that would be a good first step.

 

[The Infidel]

There is one reason that the top tax bracket is never raised anymore.

They are the ones who pay the meal tickets of our government representatives.


The right loves it that way.

 

[Misty]

I wonder if those same 81% would vote to raise their own taxes?

 

[The Infidel]

Under Eisenhower, a republican, the richest were taxed at 91%. That was when we got our interstate highway system.

91% of what?

Why not take it all?

That would be MORE better

 

[Truthmatters]

The wealthy can chose not to pay the taxes by taking their money and moving oout of the country.


They pay the same amount as everyone else who makes as much as they do in this country.


IF you wish to stay in this country and use its infrastructure so that you can gain more money then you should pay for that use.


America is the worlds top market and coming with the ability to access this top market comes a fee.


Its called taxes.


Instead of just permitting the wealthy to just move here and get a free ride on all America has to offer them they need to pay for their use of everything the people have invested in and built.


When federal funds are doled out to the states so they can maintain roads and bridges I think the people who use them the most should pony up a good chunk of the cost to build and maintain such things.


The wealthy benifit the most from our infrastructure and each dollar they make in the US reflects that use.

It also reflects their need to pitch in and pony up their fair share of the cost to build, fix and maintain our countries LIFE BLOOD of industry, Our infrastructure.

 

[The Infidel]

I wonder if those same 81% would vote to raise their own taxes?

They prolly polled folks in an unemployment line.....

 

[The Infidel]

The wealthy can chose not to pay the taxes by taking their money and moving oout of the country.


The pay the same amount a everyone else who makes as much as they do in this country.


IF you wish to stay in this country and use its infrastructure so that you can gain more money then you should pay for that use.


America is the worlds top market and coming with the ability to access this top market comes a fee.


Its called taxes.


Instead of just permitting the wealthy to just move here and get a free ride on all America has to offer them they need to pay for their use of everything the people have invested in and built.


When federal funds are doled out to the states so they can maintain roads and bridges I think the people who use them the most should pony up a good chunk of the cost to build and maintain such things.


The wealthy benifit the most from our infrastructure and each dollar they make in the US refelts that use.

It also reflects their need to pitch in and pony up their fair share of the cost to build fix and maintain our countries LIFE BLOOD of industry, Our infrastructure.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yes, let's squash economic growth even more so that a larger portion of the population will become government dependents.

Great idea.

First, you have to be gullible-enough to accept that bullshit Absolute: Tax-increases create jobs.

​

"The central concept of supply-side economics is that tax cuts cause economic growth. Tax cuts allow entrepreneurs to invest their tax savings, which creates higher productivity, jobs and profits. This, ironically, allows the entrepreneur and his new workers to pay even more taxes, even at lower rates.

The supply-side idea is a simple one, and makes a popular political message. However, it is interesting to note that mainstream economists -- even conservative ones -- almost universally reject supply-side theory.

The Rosy Scenario failed to materialize. The economy did not grow out of its deficits. In 1986, Washington and the rest of the nation would again be surprised when (David) Stockman confessed all in a book entitled The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed."

SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS​

 

[DaGoose]

celere: Today's polling figures. 81% of Americans support taxes on millionair*es


“Today's polling figures.

81% of Americans support taxes on millionair*es

68% of Americans support eliminatin*g the Bush tax cuts

74% of Americans support cutting oil/gas tax breaks

77% of Americans support bargaining rights for public sectors unions

Of those polled, 36% self-ident*ify as conservati*ve, 24% self-ident*ify as liberal

Polled by: NBC/Wall Street Journal”

Then it's time for our government to do the will of the vast majority.

 

[DaGoose]

I wonder if those same 81% would vote to raise their own taxes?

I would and as an elected local official I have in the past.

 

[DaGoose]

Well we see what we have here, it's a right wing message board as it should be 4 to 1 to raise taxes on the very rich, but 9-1 against on this site, gee I wonder why they know so much about Fox on here, LOL what a joke.

this is a "rightwing" messageboard?
REALLY?>?????

Oh yeah.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Under Eisenhower, a republican, the richest were taxed at 91%. That was when we got our interstate highway system.

Yeah, but.....much like education.....the interstate highway system was one o' those evil long-term investments.

In this-day-and-age, if an investor can't realize maximum-profits in 30 days, it's considered a poor investment.....and, how ya' gonna buy that second yacht....

.....if your tax-dollars are wasted on long-term-investments??

​

 

[kaz]

The wealthy can chose not to pay the taxes by taking their money and moving oout of the country.


They pay the same amount as everyone else who makes as much as they do in this country.


IF you wish to stay in this country and use its infrastructure so that you can gain more money then you should pay for that use.


America is the worlds top market and coming with the ability to access this top market comes a fee.


Its called taxes.


Instead of just permitting the wealthy to just move here and get a free ride on all America has to offer them they need to pay for their use of everything the people have invested in and built.


When federal funds are doled out to the states so they can maintain roads and bridges I think the people who use them the most should pony up a good chunk of the cost to build and maintain such things.


The wealthy benifit the most from our infrastructure and each dollar they make in the US reflects that use.

It also reflects their need to pitch in and pony up their fair share of the cost to build, fix and maintain our countries LIFE BLOOD of industry, Our infrastructure.

Besides, the ******* rich bastards, I hate them. You are right, comrade. Let's see if I have this straight.

1) People need the money, so they should receives what they need

2) Rich pricks can afford it, so they should pay what I want because I have decided they have the means.

So you are saying from each according to their means to each according to their needs.

Where have I heard this before???

 

[Synthaholic]

Yes, let's squash economic growth even more so that a larger portion of the population will become government dependents.

Great idea.

Proof?

Nope!

 

[kaz]

Yes, let's squash economic growth even more so that a larger portion of the population will become government dependents.

Great idea.

Proof?

Nope!

He's got the entire field of economics behind him, but you mean what does he have beyond that? You got him there...

 

[MaggieMae]

Only 22% think that tax increases help the economy...............

45% Favor Candidate Who Promises to Only Raise Taxes on Wealthy, Highest Level In Over Two Years - Rasmussen Reports™


22%!!!!! Laugh my balls off..........I didnt even think that there were even that many dummies who thought that.


Clearly........a position only taken by the legions of the confused.

How many balls do you have anyway?

 

[Jarhead]

Yes, let's squash economic growth even more so that a larger portion of the population will become government dependents.

Great idea.

Proof?

Nope!

He's got the entire field of economics behind him, but you mean what does he have beyond that? You got him there...

When the proof supports the sentiments of the right, the left insists on additional proof.

They see theory as proof and facts as not worthy of consideration.

 

[MaggieMae]

Well more of a cheer leader.

Playing alot of "catching up". Still it's probably not going to make up for all the loses that occurred during the Bush administration. The reality is that Bush and his Conservative base happily ran the American economy into a big pile of shit.

Digging out is going to stink.

yeah.....but nobody cares about Bush anymore except the internet k00ks..........

Which is to bad really.

Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it.

Wanna bet how many of those internet kOOks will emerge from their slumber if Hillary Clinton decides to run again? It will be a renewal of the old CFDR (Clinton FAMILY Derangement Syndrome).