We need to Tax the Rich

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    Why that's mighty generous (or STUPID) of Obama the magnificent.

    Our tax dollars to GE and our jobs to China.

    Thanks Bammy !!! Dis ain't da hood no mo bro.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    the progressive mantra is:

    Tax the rich;
    Feed the poor;
    'til there aint no;
    Rich no more;

    I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I'll leave it up to you.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    Those words, if put to music, would make one hell of a song!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from lawboy. Show lawboy's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    lowest tax rates since the1950s....my tax rate is 30% the 50 mil a year hedge fund manager's is 15% WHY?
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    As best as I can tell, the typical conservative arguments against increased taxation on the wealthy are:

    1) It would slow economic growth.
    2) It's unfair.

    The former's evidence is very thin indeed, and the latter's popularity is increasingly non-existent.

    Barring any new data, can anyone offer another credible case for NOT eliminating the Bush/Obama* tax cuts to wealthy americans...??
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]As best as I can tell, the typical conservative arguments against increased taxation on the wealthy are: 1) It would slow economic growth. 2) It's unfair. The former's evidence is very thin indeed, and the latter's popularity is increasingly non-existent. Barring any new data, can anyone offer another credible case for NOT eliminating the Bush/Obama* tax cuts to wealthy americans...??
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    If the top 4% paid 70% of the income taxes, would you call that unfair?

    It will slow economic growth.  Again, read Thomas Sowell on this.
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : If the top 4% paid 70% of the income taxes, would you call that unfair? It will slow economic growth.  Again, read Thomas Sowell on this.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    "Fairness" doesn't enter into it...a matter of opinion.  But if you want to talk about the disparity of wealth between households of minorities and non-minorities in terms of fairness, that's another argument in which conservatives have little traction...

    Or perhaps you could offer something of your own on this topic....
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]As best as I can tell, the typical conservative arguments against increased taxation on the wealthy are: 1) It would slow economic growth. 2) It's unfair. The former's evidence is very thin indeed, and the latter's popularity is increasingly non-existent. Barring any new data, can anyone offer another credible case for NOT eliminating the Bush/Obama* tax cuts to wealthy americans...??
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    3)  It won't be spent wisely
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : Pssssst. You aren't allowed to say "rich" any more. Now you say "job creator." Didn't you get the memo?
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    Your music collection is not really broad, is it? Maybe my post is lyrical, just maybe.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : Good one.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    You have no teaste in anything.

    Population.  Keeps on breeding;
    Nation bleeding, still more feeding economy;

    I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do;

    So I'll leave it up to you.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : You miss the point if we paid 100% tax rate, "everyone" for two years, it would cover just one year. 
    Posted by howiewho[/QUOTE]

    Simple.  We'll just tax them 200% year two.

    This liberal math is the schnizzle!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : 3)  It won't be spent wisely
    Posted by UserName99[/QUOTE]

    ...speculative, but sadly possible...

    Could you elaborate?  "Spent wisely" how...like the Iraq War? SDI? No-bid contracts?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : ...speculative, but sadly possible... Could you elaborate?  "Spent wisely" how...like the Iraq War? SDI? No-bid contracts?
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    I could elaborate, but would take hours.  Your examples will work just fine.  Both parties have demonstrated an insatiable appetite for spending in the past 30 yrs.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    Until the Congress gets spending under control and stops throwing our money away, they have no right to ask us for higher taxes.  ANY of us.

    Would you give your friend money to get his electricity turned back on when you knew he was dining on filet mignon and that he just bought the latest iphone??


     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]Until the Congress gets spending under control and stops throwing our money away, they have no right to ask us for higher taxes.  ANY of us. Would you give your friend money to get his electricity turned back on when you knew he was dining on filet mignon and that he just bought the latest iphone??
    Posted by macnh1[/QUOTE]

    Building on that:  I live a very financially responsible life, no debt, no fancy cars, fancy vacations, I live simply.  As a result, I have lots of money saved up.  When I see the number of new cars on the highways, see the McMansions that people used to snap up like candy, I get upset that people think the solution is to tax me more.  Any poll that supports raising the debt ceiling is full of these people, because that's the way they are leading their own lives.  It  is unsustainable, both individually, and for our nation.

    Message to all you spending idiots out there, no one owes you a certain lifestyle, and that extends to what ever government is willing to provide you.  Don't tax me any more to pay for your "entitlement".
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich : "Fairness" doesn't enter into it...a matter of opinion.  But if you want to talk about the disparity of wealth between households of minorities and non-minorities in terms of fairness, that's another argument in which conservatives have little traction... Or perhaps you could offer something of your own on this topic....
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    So, you say that the rich don't pay more is unfair.

    I ask if the top 4% paying 70% of the income tax is fair,

    And then you decide fairness is not the issue, moving the goal posts.

    you couldn't answer the question, could you?

    Should all peopl have equal wealth?  Earned or unearned?  Is it the role of government to redistributre others wealth to those who have not earned it?

    Is it fair to take from those who produce, and give it to those who, watch this now, won't produce?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: We need to Tax the Rich

    In Response to Re: We need to Tax the Rich:
    [QUOTE]As best as I can tell, the typical conservative arguments against increased taxation on the wealthy are: 1) It would slow economic growth. 2) It's unfair. The former's evidence is very thin indeed, and the latter's popularity is increasingly non-existent. Barring any new data, can anyone offer another credible case for NOT eliminating the Bush/Obama* tax cuts to wealthy americans...??
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    Although I believe keeping the Bush Tax cuts in place would be better for the country trying to emerge from recession like stagnation, the bigger problem is the rising debt and deficits.  So I say give the left their talking points; remove the corporate jet tax credits and cancel the Bush Tax cuts.  Then go after the real problems with the budget; entitlements and require a real adult discussion and cut the pandering to AARP it's not their money the government spent it, it was never safe in an account for them FICA has just been a tax going into the general fund.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share