You Taught The GOP A Lesson: You Want Higher Taxes So They Will Grant Your Wish

[LeftCoastVoter]

The top 10% of earners pay 70% of the taxes, Joe.

Can you define 'fair share'?

fair share would equate to the percentage of my income that i pay to taxes. why should someone who makes millions per year pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than someone who make less than $100k? those making less than $100k put the majority of their income back into the economy which stimulates it and creates growth and job opportunities. the same can not be said for the top 2%.

rebuttal?

Why should someone who makes 250K pay a higher percentage?

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income no matter its source to the government

we have a graduated tax system for a reason. this was the policy put in place a long time to equate to fairness. look at when the top tax rate was 91%. we paid for the interstate highway system and saw a huge amount of wealth created. look at what happened under Clinton. the GOP claimed raising the top tax rate would cripple job creation, when in fact is created millions of jobs and the wealthy made more money as well.

 

[Katzndogz]

I want to see taxes raised, as much as possible, as a tactical move. Nothing will inspire enthusiasm for limited government like being forced to pay the bill.

Really? Have you ever taken a close look at California? 167 Billion in debt now. They just voted to raise taxes on themselves. What do you think will happen next? A. they pay down the debt.. or b. they find some new shit to spend the new revenues on? Take your time.

Not a dime of the increased taxes is even earmarked for the debt. Most of it is supposed to go for the train to nowhere from nowhere.

 

[martybegan]

I want to see taxes raised, as much as possible, as a tactical move. Nothing will inspire enthusiasm for limited government like being forced to pay the bill.

Really? Have you ever taken a close look at California? 167 Billion in debt now. They just voted to raise taxes on themselves. What do you think will happen next? A. they pay down the debt.. or b. they find some new shit to spend the new revenues on? Take your time.

I choose b). find more shit to spend money on. I would guess it will be something to do with public sector pensions.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

@Willow Tree:

According to estimates the wealth of america is $44T. (google it if you like) If, as people argue, that the top 2% own 80% of the wealth that would equate to approx $35.2T. at $3T a year, that would actually fund the government for nearly 10 years, or pay off of the full debt and then fund the government for another 5 years are current spending level. so your argument isnt exactly accurate.

The 47% that don't pay any federal income taxes is actually due to the GOP policies of lowering tax rates and increasing deductions in the past. these are also the same people who on average take home less than $50k annually while supporting a family of 4.

people seem to rail on the 47% that dont pay federal income taxes, when by law they dont make enough to get out from underneath the standard deduction. this is a fools argument, i fail to see how taxing those who already struggle to make ends meet is the solution?

the final solution is an all of the above solution which is what Obama has proposed. simply look back at the debt ceiling debate. Obama put entitlement on the table as part of the grand bargain, however since for every $3 in spending cuts, the deal included $1 in new taxes Boehner caved to the TP and backed out of the deal. This is what caused them to create the gang of 6. when they couldnt agree the automatic spending cuts fail safe came into play. why is this set of facts forgotten by the GOP/TP/Conservatives all the time?

How much of that wealth is liquid? And for the non liquid wealth, if you confiscate all of the wealth from the top 2% who will be around to buy it so you COULD liquidate it?

The takers aren't talking about buying what you've earned they are talking about TAKING it. Socialism.

you missed the whole point of what i said. i am not advocating taking everything from the top 2%, i was simply showing the holes in the logic that was presented.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

I want to see taxes raised, as much as possible, as a tactical move. Nothing will inspire enthusiasm for limited government like being forced to pay the bill.

Really? Have you ever taken a close look at California? 167 Billion in debt now. They just voted to raise taxes on themselves. What do you think will happen next? A. they pay down the debt.. or b. they find some new shit to spend the new revenues on? Take your time.

Not a dime of the increased taxes is even earmarked for the debt. Most of it is supposed to go for the train to nowhere from nowhere.

can you prove this claim?

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Why should someone who makes 250K pay a higher percentage?

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income no matter its source to the government

To pay for stuff

To reduce our debt / need to borrow more

To restore wealth distribution to 1980 levels (redistributive effect)

To grow the economy more rapidly

To encourage tax-dodging, via reinvesting and bonuses to prized workers

Taxes take money out of the economy so how can higher taxes grow the economy?

look at what happened under Clinton.

 

[regent]

Imagine if Reagan and Bush had not given us lower taxes and two wars, and America had just gone along as usual, paying its taxes, and tending to the usual problems of government.
What those tax cuts have cost America, the turmoil, the crisis, the gridlock, the cliff, the trying to keep the economy afloat, and all to give the wealthy a few more bucks. For now, let's pay the piper, get the country back on an even keel and not fall for the trickle down, supply side, and other tax gimmicks the Republicans dream up. When the Republican hucksters return with their dog and pony tax show, and they will, let's not be taken in again. We could destroy America.

You are talking out your ass, if you really believed what you're saying you would believe that ALL Americans should be taxed and at the same rate. You cannot run a country that leaves 50% of their citizens off the FEDERAL tax hook/// ya end up with too many takers, and not enough makers. but good luck to ya on your endeavors.

I would suspect that most Americans are not off the federal tax hook. True, some may not pay federal taxes on incomes because that's a tax on incomes, not a tax on people, property, autos, but incomes. We pay according to income those without enough income pay none or less than others. Romney didn't mention all those that do not pay a tax on cigarettes, just income.
What may be bad, is that the Republicans created an economic recession so that incomes, and ergo the tax did not bring in the revenue needed. America simply needs higher incomes with less loopholes to take care of its needs.
In any case, most people pay taxes, many paid more taxes than Romney and many with far less income.

 

[Katzndogz]

fair share would equate to the percentage of my income that i pay to taxes. why should someone who makes millions per year pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than someone who make less than $100k? those making less than $100k put the majority of their income back into the economy which stimulates it and creates growth and job opportunities. the same can not be said for the top 2%.

rebuttal?

Why should someone who makes 250K pay a higher percentage?

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income no matter its source to the government

we have a graduated tax system for a reason. this was the policy put in place a long time to equate to fairness. look at when the top tax rate was 91%. we paid for the interstate highway system and saw a huge amount of wealth created. look at what happened under Clinton. the GOP claimed raising the top tax rate would cripple job creation, when in fact is created millions of jobs and the wealthy made more money as well.

The mistake is in a misapplication of cause and effect. Liberals believe that high taxes cause economic growth. The correct understanding is that only in times of economic growth can high taxes exist. When we had a 90% tax rate, it was after WWII when we had the world's only functioning economy. We had a 70% tax rate at the dawn of the information age when the internet exploded in expansion. Had there been no dot com boom, we could not have absorbed Clinton's tax rate and would have gone into fiscal collapse then.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Of course obama is pulling the wool over his sheep's eyes, they say, yeah tax them rich people..Like that will DO ANYTHING to tackle the problems he has now HELP CREATE

The top 10% have 90% of the wealth. I find it hard to believe that raising taxes on them won't solve our problems.

When the rich paid their fair share, we had balanced budgets.

The top 1% already pay 70% of all income taxes paid. The wealthy also pay more in property tax, sales tax and every other kind of tax. If they were taxed at 90%, the collected tax would run the government for 8.5 days and not touch the debt at all.

You might find it hard to believe, but that doesn't change the facts that the rich just aren't that rich. There are no trillionaires in the world. Then too, there is the idea that even if the rich are heavily taxed, it can only be done one time. 1,700 of America's wealthy left the country last year alone. They paid the taxes due, but there will be no more. Then too, taxes depends on the continued efforts of the greatest producers to generate income. They don't have to generate anything. They can take what they have, close the business and generate nothing, like Hostess did.

If taxing the rich was a solution, California would not be in the fiscal straits that it is.

so individuals making tens of millions annually arent considered rich?

 

[Skull Pilot]

fair share would equate to the percentage of my income that i pay to taxes. why should someone who makes millions per year pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than someone who make less than $100k? those making less than $100k put the majority of their income back into the economy which stimulates it and creates growth and job opportunities. the same can not be said for the top 2%.

rebuttal?

Why should someone who makes 250K pay a higher percentage?

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income no matter its source to the government

we have a graduated tax system for a reason. this was the policy put in place a long time to equate to fairness. look at when the top tax rate was 91%. we paid for the interstate highway system and saw a huge amount of wealth created. look at what happened under Clinton. the GOP claimed raising the top tax rate would cripple job creation, when in fact is created millions of jobs and the wealthy made more money as well.

And what you forget to mention, as anyone who pines for the good old days of a 90% bracket does, is that everyone was paying significantly higher taxes then not just the so called rich.

in 1954 when the top bracket was 91% the lowest was 20% and someone earning 40K was in the 56% bracket.

So be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

I want to see taxes raised, as much as possible, as a tactical move. Nothing will inspire enthusiasm for limited government like being forced to pay the bill.

Really? Have you ever taken a close look at California? 167 Billion in debt now. They just voted to raise taxes on themselves. What do you think will happen next? A. they pay down the debt.. or b. they find some new shit to spend the new revenues on? Take your time.

do you know what the increase in taxes is already earmarked for by law/

 

[Skull Pilot]

To pay for stuff

To reduce our debt / need to borrow more

To restore wealth distribution to 1980 levels (redistributive effect)

To grow the economy more rapidly

To encourage tax-dodging, via reinvesting and bonuses to prized workers

Taxes take money out of the economy so how can higher taxes grow the economy?

look at what happened under Clinton.

Correlation does not equal causation.

http://www.stats.org/faq_vs.htm

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Nor does it imply causation.

 

[mudwhistle]

If you really think the GOP is going to be stupid enough to raise taxes on the middle class because the rich will be finally paying their fair share, you're delusional.

The top 10% of earners pay 70% of the taxes, Joe.

Can you define 'fair share'?

fair share would equate to the percentage of my income that i pay to taxes. why should someone who makes millions per year pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than someone who make less than $100k? those making less than $100k put the majority of their income back into the economy which stimulates it and creates growth and job opportunities. the same can not be said for the top 2%.

rebuttal?

Federal taxes are not paid on what you're worth. They are paid when money changes hands.

Can you understand the concept?

If you want a federal property tax move to Germany.

If you add up all of the state, federal, and local taxes they pay it's more of a percentage than you'll ever pay.

These stupid progressive ideas are designed to cause cut-backs and hording which eventually leads to more class-warfare.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Why should someone who makes 250K pay a higher percentage?

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income no matter its source to the government

we have a graduated tax system for a reason. this was the policy put in place a long time to equate to fairness. look at when the top tax rate was 91%. we paid for the interstate highway system and saw a huge amount of wealth created. look at what happened under Clinton. the GOP claimed raising the top tax rate would cripple job creation, when in fact is created millions of jobs and the wealthy made more money as well.

And what you forget to mention, as anyone who pines for the good old days of a 90% bracket does, is that everyone was paying significantly higher taxes then not just the so called rich.

in 1954 when the top bracket was 91% the lowest was 20% and someone earning 40K was in the 56% bracket.

So be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

yet $40k in 1954 is equal to $343k today. and the 56% tax bracket is not for all income, it is a graduate system. this it the current graduated tax rate system:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $8,700, plus
15% on taxable income over $8,700 to $35,350, plus
25% on taxable income over $35,350 to $85,650, plus
28% on taxable income over $85,650 to $178,650, plus
33% on taxable income over $178,650 to $388,350, plus

so if the top rate was 56% today, it would only apply to income over $178,650. they would still pay the lower rates on all income below that according to the tax tables.

 

[Paulie]

Under Clinton the internet really got going.

But that probably had nothing to do with any of the economic prosperity. It had to be the taxes.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Taxes take money out of the economy so how can higher taxes grow the economy?

look at what happened under Clinton.

Correlation does not equal causation.

taxes also pay for government contracts and government salaries which in turn gives people money to spend in the economy. so simply saying that taxes so not stimulate the economy is false.

 

[tjvh]

Of course obama is pulling the wool over his sheep's eyes, they say, yeah tax them rich people..Like that will DO ANYTHING to tackle the problems he has now HELP CREATE

The top 10% have 90% of the wealth. I find it hard to believe that raising taxes on them won't solve our problems.

When the rich paid their fair share, we had balanced budgets.

Their fair share? What the **** ever happened to the American Dream... You know, the idea that if you work hard enough you will become successful. You ******* lazy bums want to sit on your asses and punish the people who provide jobs that allow the rest of us to earn a living, and reward the bums who are more content sitting on their porch downing forties... You morons truly make me sick because you're too stupid to realize that it's your own laziness and entitlement mentality that is destroying America. The idea that you can study hard, become successful, and reap the rewards without being fleeced by the Government is dying a quick death. You idiots don't realize that what you are asking for is a finite income... If you make too much, you lose it. A living like that... You might as well be a slave. You want to punish those who work hard, and reward those who don't...And never will. In the long run you're destroying the American Dream, and ensuring Americans live akin to indentured servants with little possibility of ever being something more.

 

[Skull Pilot]

we have a graduated tax system for a reason. this was the policy put in place a long time to equate to fairness. look at when the top tax rate was 91%. we paid for the interstate highway system and saw a huge amount of wealth created. look at what happened under Clinton. the GOP claimed raising the top tax rate would cripple job creation, when in fact is created millions of jobs and the wealthy made more money as well.

And what you forget to mention, as anyone who pines for the good old days of a 90% bracket does, is that everyone was paying significantly higher taxes then not just the so called rich.

in 1954 when the top bracket was 91% the lowest was 20% and someone earning 40K was in the 56% bracket.

So be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

yet $40k in 1954 is equal to $343k today. and the 56% tax bracket is not for all income, it is a graduate system. this it the current graduated tax rate system:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $8,700, plus
15% on taxable income over $8,700 to $35,350, plus
25% on taxable income over $35,350 to $85,650, plus
28% on taxable income over $85,650 to $178,650, plus
33% on taxable income over $178,650 to $388,350, plus

so if the top rate was 56% today, it would only apply to income over $178,650. they would still pay the lower rates on all income below that according to the tax tables.

the problem here is that there are too many bullshit tax deductions that allow people to have no taxable income.. 47% of people to be exact.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Under Clinton the internet really got going.

But that probably had nothing to do with any of the economic prosperity. It had to be the taxes.

government R&D money helped create the internet. all paid for through........ taxes...