Republicans want to raise taxes on those making less than 106K a year

[Truthmatters]

Guys this is about Obama not raising taxes and your team raising them

 

[NYcarbineer]

Everyone should be paying their fair share, not just the rich.

The lowest quintile of households pay 8.8% in payroll taxes. The top 1% pay 1.6%

What would make that fair? Both pay 5.2% ?

 

[Conservative]

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Estate and gift tax rules

The EGTRRA made sweeping changes to the estate tax, gift tax, and generation-skipping transfer tax.
The estate tax unified credit exclusion, which was $675,000 in 2001 but scheduled to increase by steps to $1,000,000 in 2006, was increased to $1,000,000 in 2002, $1,500,000 in 2004, $2,000,000 in 2006, and $3,500,000 in 2009, with repeal of the estate tax and generation-skipping tax scheduled for 2010.

why do you ignore the preponderance of evidence?

 

[Truthmatters]

Social Security payroll taxes apply only to the first $106,800 of a worker's wages. Therefore, $2,136 is the biggest benefit anyone can gain from the one-year reduction.

The great majority of Americans make less than $106,800 a year. Millions of workers pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.

The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

But Republican lawmakers haven't always worried about tax cuts increasing the deficit. They led the fight to extend the life of a much bigger tax break: the major 2001 income tax reduction enacted under Bush. It was scheduled to expire at the start of this year. Obama campaigned on a pledge to end the tax break only for the richest Americans, but solid GOP opposition forced him to back down.

Many Republicans are adamant about not raising taxes but largely silent on what it would mean to let the payroll tax break expire.

Republicans cite key differences between the two "temporary" taxes, starting with the fact that the Bush measure had a 10-year life from the start. To stimulate job growth, these lawmakers say, it's better to reduce income tax rates for people and for companies than to extend the payroll tax break.

The Associated Press: GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block

remember

 

[Charles_Main]

they are getting tripped up pretty good with this one.


Maybe Obama has finnally out manuvered them

Tripped up? Not at all. Fair is fair. Everyone should pay something.

 

[Conservative]

Guys this is about Obama not raising taxes and your team raising them

Even PolitiFact Admits: President Obama Raised Taxes

President Barack Obama told Fox News‘ Bill O’Reilly: “I didn’t raise taxes once.” As PolitiFact points out, not only is this completely false, but President Obama began raising taxes almost immediately upon taking office

The idea that Obama did not raise taxes is just plain wrong. He signed legislation raising taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products soon after taking office...

He also signed the health care law, which includes taxes on indoor tanning that went into effect last year...

The new health care law also includes a tax on people who decide not to have health insurance...

Individuals who make more than $200,000 and couples that make more than $250,000 will see additional Medicare taxes of 0.9 percent...

new fees on health insurance companies and prescription drug manufacturers, and a new tax on high-cost “Cadillac” health insurance plans...

Why do you ignore the preponderance of evidence?

 

[Charles_Main]

Social Security payroll taxes apply only to the first $106,800 of a worker's wages. Therefore, $2,136 is the biggest benefit anyone can gain from the one-year reduction.

The great majority of Americans make less than $106,800 a year. Millions of workers pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.

The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

But Republican lawmakers haven't always worried about tax cuts increasing the deficit. They led the fight to extend the life of a much bigger tax break: the major 2001 income tax reduction enacted under Bush. It was scheduled to expire at the start of this year. Obama campaigned on a pledge to end the tax break only for the richest Americans, but solid GOP opposition forced him to back down.

Many Republicans are adamant about not raising taxes but largely silent on what it would mean to let the payroll tax break expire.

Republicans cite key differences between the two "temporary" taxes, starting with the fact that the Bush measure had a 10-year life from the start. To stimulate job growth, these lawmakers say, it's better to reduce income tax rates for people and for companies than to extend the payroll tax break.

The Associated Press: GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block

Why do you call it Raising Revenues when Democrats want to do it, and raising Taxes now?

lol

 

[hortysir]

from the linked article in the OP...

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says payroll tax reductions give the economy a short-term boost. But it says the benefit is bigger if employers get the tax break instead of, or along with, workers.

So, Democrats are against giving the economy a bigger boost. Typical.

Neither House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, nor Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has taken a firm stand on whether to extend the one-year tax cut.

So, not all Republicans have taken a stand one way or the other. Only mouth breathing Dems would say that means they support letting the holiday end. Typical.

Many Democrats also are ambivalent about Obama's proposed tax cut extension.

Interesting. Only in a mouth breathing Democratic world, would having the same position as your opposition mean you're right and they are wrong. Again... typical.

I wonder why Chris didn't include these points????


So which Republicans, exactly, "want to raise taxes on those making less than $106k"??

 

[Charles_Main]

Social Security payroll taxes apply only to the first $106,800 of a worker's wages. Therefore, $2,136 is the biggest benefit anyone can gain from the one-year reduction.

The great majority of Americans make less than $106,800 a year. Millions of workers pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.

The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

But Republican lawmakers haven't always worried about tax cuts increasing the deficit. They led the fight to extend the life of a much bigger tax break: the major 2001 income tax reduction enacted under Bush. It was scheduled to expire at the start of this year. Obama campaigned on a pledge to end the tax break only for the richest Americans, but solid GOP opposition forced him to back down.

Many Republicans are adamant about not raising taxes but largely silent on what it would mean to let the payroll tax break expire.

Republicans cite key differences between the two "temporary" taxes, starting with the fact that the Bush measure had a 10-year life from the start. To stimulate job growth, these lawmakers say, it's better to reduce income tax rates for people and for companies than to extend the payroll tax break.

The Associated Press: GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block

Why do you call it Raising Revenues when Democrats want to do it, and raising Taxes now?

lol

Are you saying no To Raising Revenues?

You think 0% is to High? You think getting thousands of Dollars more back than you paid in, is paying to much?

Our Tax System, with all the Credits, has turned into nothing but another way to Take Money from one Group of People and give it to Another.

If you really want people Paying their Fair Share, then yes, even the Poor need to pay something.

 

[Sundial]

Yes we do, eventually anyways. Everyone should share the burden of supporting the thieves in Washington. Currently the bottom half pay nothing to DC. I fail to see the controversy. Even Obama says everyone should pay their fair share.

This is a lie. ^^^^^ And I think you know it.

That makes you a liar.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Everyone should be paying their fair share, not just the rich.

The lowest quintile of households pay 8.8% in payroll taxes. The top 1% pay 1.6%

What would make that fair? Both pay 5.2% ?

Who knew that SS & Med rates were diferent based on income?

 

[NYcarbineer]

How awesome is it to see the anti-tax rightwing fanatics leap at the chance to raise taxes on the poor??

I hope no one on the left is surprised. Shame on you if you didn't see this coming.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's just another Obama idea to blow up the deficit and the economy

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Social Security payroll taxes apply only to the first $106,800 of a worker's wages. Therefore, $2,136 is the biggest benefit anyone can gain from the one-year reduction.

The great majority of Americans make less than $106,800 a year. Millions of workers pay more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.

The 12-month tax reduction will cost the government about $120 billion this year, and a similar amount next year if it's renewed.

That worries Rep. David Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the House-Senate supercommittee tasked with finding new deficit cuts. Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said.

But Republican lawmakers haven't always worried about tax cuts increasing the deficit. They led the fight to extend the life of a much bigger tax break: the major 2001 income tax reduction enacted under Bush. It was scheduled to expire at the start of this year. Obama campaigned on a pledge to end the tax break only for the richest Americans, but solid GOP opposition forced him to back down.

Many Republicans are adamant about not raising taxes but largely silent on what it would mean to let the payroll tax break expire.

Republicans cite key differences between the two "temporary" taxes, starting with the fact that the Bush measure had a 10-year life from the start. To stimulate job growth, these lawmakers say, it's better to reduce income tax rates for people and for companies than to extend the payroll tax break.

The Associated Press: GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block

Why do you call it Raising Revenues when Democrats want to do it, and raising Taxes now?

lol

Are you saying no To Raising Revenues?

You think 0% is to High? You think getting thousands of Dollars more back than you paid in, is paying to much?

Our Tax System, with all the Credits, has turned into nothing but another way to Take Money from one Group of People and give it to Another.

If you really want people Paying their Fair Share, then yes, even the Poor need to pay something.

Because liberals are full-of-shit... that's why.

 

[Sundial]

It averages out to about a thousand dollars a year from what I hear. That translates to about 19 dollars a week on an average. Do you really think that 20 bucks a week is going to jumpstart our economy? Get real and come up with a solution that actually has a lasting impact.

It may mean nothing to you. (Probably because you don't work.)

But that doesn't mean it means nothing to working people who benefit from it.

It could mean, for example, being able to afford a shitty car to get you to work and back.

 

[Sundial]

Republicans will defend to the death tax breaks for the rich, but don't care about raising taxes on working people.

It's amazing anyone who makes less than $100k per year would vote for those people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Everyone should be paying their fair share, not just the rich.

The lowest quintile of households pay 8.8% in payroll taxes. The top 1% pay 1.6%

What would make that fair? Both pay 5.2% ?

Who knew that SS & Med rates were diferent based on income?

Probably you didn't.

 

[Sundial]

Republicans will defend to the death tax breaks for the rich, but don't care about raising taxes on working people.

You guys are the ones who keep talking about Everyone paying their fair Share while half the People Pay nothing and 10% of them pay 90%.

You guys want to make that even more skewed so even more people pay nothing and the top 10% carry even more of the Burden.

Sorry anyone who knows the Definition of Fair, Knows you are full of shit.

Dude, you're making shit up. Even the most rightwing sources place the top 10 @ around 70%. All these analyses disregard FICA altogether - As stated earlier, EVERYONE who earns even a single dollar in wages pays into FICA. This 'half that pay nothing' DOES. NOT. FUCKING. EXIST.

It's especially ironic that you wheel that crufty shit out in this particular thread, since FICA is precisely what's being discussed.

Promise me... PROMISE, and mean it this time... That you will read something not from Heritage before you post here again. Promise?

It's important to remember that they'll keep lying no matter how many times you catch them at it; but you have to do it anyway because a lie that goes unchallenged eventually becomes the "truth".

That's why they do it.

 

[hortysir]

Republicans will defend to the death tax breaks for the rich, but don't care about raising taxes on working people.

You guys are the ones who keep talking about Everyone paying their fair Share while half the People Pay nothing and 10% of them pay 90%.

You guys want to make that even more skewed so even more people pay nothing and the top 10% carry even more of the Burden.

Sorry anyone who knows the Definition of Fair, Knows you are full of shit.

Dude, you're making shit up. Even the most rightwing sources place the top 10 @ around 70%. All these analyses disregard FICA altogether - As stated earlier, EVERYONE who earns even a single dollar in wages pays into FICA. This 'half that pay nothing' DOES. NOT. FUCKING. EXIST.

It's especially ironic that you wheel that crufty shit out in this particular thread, since FICA is precisely what's being discussed.

Promise me... PROMISE, and mean it this time... That you will read something not from Heritage before you post here again. Promise?

When these people only pay (for example) $400 in taxes all year long, and then get back $2,400 that equals - NOT. PAYING. TAXES

 

[Sundial]

and what do you call fair share?

squeezing pennys out of the starving?

You would have to have debtors prison for the ones who decided to eat instead of pay taxes.

The "starving" don't pay taxes, stupid.

Show us where they do.

Every working person in the country pays payroll taxes. Everyone who buys stuff pays sales taxes. Everyone who has property pays property taxes.