Obama and Hillary vote to raise taxes on the middle class

unsung
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
edited March 2008 in A Moving Train
Anyone who makes over $31k a year is going to be taxed a little more. This is based on the budget vote, on the news right now.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    double
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    unsung wrote:
    Anyone who makes over $31k a year is going to be taxed a little more. This is based on the budget vote, on the news right now.
    raising taxes. are you fucking kidding me. There is so much waste in the federal gov't they could pay for streets paved in gold if they did a little housekeeping.

    This is fucked. The middle class has been shrinking for decades, the lower class growing in relation to it. And now they take another shot at the middle class.
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Yeah and these are the people who say they are for the middle class.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    unsung wrote:
    Yeah and these are the people who say they are for the middle class.
    Why do people most adversley affected by republican party policies end up voting for them anyway. been a question I"ve had since I saw Ed ask it on storytellers.
  • KDH12
    KDH12 Posts: 2,096
    unsung wrote:
    Anyone who makes over $31k a year is going to be taxed a little more. This is based on the budget vote, on the news right now.


    sources.....opinions........right wing media.......

    unsung's song is played out :)
    **CUBS GO ALL THE WAY IN......never **
  • blackredyellow
    blackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    KDH12 wrote:
    sources.....opinions........right wing media.......

    unsung's song is played out :)


    Yeah, if it's like his other sources it will be "I saw a guy on TV talking about this yesterday" or some crap like that.
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    from here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080313/ap_on_go_co/congress_budget

    Clinton and Obama did vote for $340 billion in tax cuts over five years for middle- and higher-income taxpayers, investors and people inheriting businesses and big estates.

    But they joined with Democrats and a couple of maverick Republicans to reject, 52-47, an additional $600 billion in extensions of income tax rate cuts, more generous estate tax cuts and relief from the alternative minimum tax.
  • down_ski
    down_ski Posts: 328
    Democrats raise taxes, thats what they do
  • pjalive21
    pjalive21 St. Louis, MO Posts: 2,818
    down_ski wrote:
    Democrats raise taxes, thats what they do

    and as simple as that sounds...no one gets it
  • SilverSeed
    SilverSeed Posts: 336
    pjalive21 wrote:
    and as simple as that sounds...no one gets it

    Because it's not simple, it's retarded. If anyone thinks Bush Jr., Bush Sr. or Reagan spent any less than Clinton did or Obama will then they're completely out of the loop. Now the question comes up, should we tax enough to cover that spending (Clinton, surplus, booming economy) or not enough (Bush, DEFICIT in caps to note size, recession)? Some of this is cyclical but a lot has to do with taxation/spending policy.

    I get it, do you?
    When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...

    "Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
  • floyd1975
    floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    SilverSeed wrote:
    Now the question comes up, should we tax enough to cover that spending (Clinton, surplus, booming economy) or not enough (Bush, DEFICIT in caps to note size, recession)?
    I get it, do you?

    Or the other question that is not asked enough is "should we cut that spending?"
  • DriftingByTheStorm
    DriftingByTheStorm Posts: 8,684
    It's for the "common good", people.

    IF YOU QUESTION THIS, YOU ARE UNAMERICAN,
    AND YOU SHOULD MOVE TO CANADA!

    ::goose step::
    sieg heil!

    :rolleyes:
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • pjalive21
    pjalive21 St. Louis, MO Posts: 2,818
    SilverSeed wrote:
    Because it's not simple, it's retarded. If anyone thinks Bush Jr., Bush Sr. or Reagan spent any less than Clinton did or Obama will then they're completely out of the loop. Now the question comes up, should we tax enough to cover that spending (Clinton, surplus, booming economy) or not enough (Bush, DEFICIT in caps to note size, recession)? Some of this is cyclical but a lot has to do with taxation/spending policy.

    I get it, do you?


    oh yes the Clinton debate and how the economy did so well...i dont have the time or energy to debate you on that one

    tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich...the same people that give you a job..and you wonder why unemployment is rising and companies are leaving America..you think taxing the rich more will help this
  • sweet adeline
    sweet adeline Posts: 2,191
    unsung wrote:
    Anyone who makes over $31k a year is going to be taxed a little more. This is based on the budget vote, on the news right now.

    your title is just slightly misleading. anyone who makes over $31k/year also includes the upper class. so this is pretty much everyone.
  • MrFadedGlory
    MrFadedGlory Posts: 207
    unsung wrote:
    Yeah and these are the people who say they are for the middle class.

    Your right to vote should be revoked, along with your right to post. He said, she said is not going to cut it in a political forum...permission has been given - to fly...head on over there where you may be cut a little slack.
    Left the Porch
  • SilverSeed
    SilverSeed Posts: 336
    pjalive21 wrote:
    oh yes the Clinton debate and how the economy did so well...i dont have the time or energy to debate you on that one

    tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich...the same people that give you a job..and you wonder why unemployment is rising and companies are leaving America..you think taxing the rich more will help this

    Sorry was this a response? It didn't address anything I said... But yes, tax the fuck out of the rich, thank you.

    Since your response doesn't seem to hold, well anything, I'll try to respond a bit. You seem to be for supply side economics. You do understand this doesn't work right? You can't pump more money to the rich and hope that it trickles down to the poor. Likewise you can't just cut taxes to corporations and hope they'll hire more Americans. They're not leaving due to taxes, though those come in a little, it's because of wages.

    And yes, the economy did fantastically during the Clinton years. That's not a debate. I'm not one to say the president is necessarily responsible for the performance of the economy, but the strength of ours during that time is undeniable.
    When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...

    "Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
  • SilverSeed
    SilverSeed Posts: 336
    floyd1975 wrote:
    Or the other question that is not asked enough is "should we cut that spending?"

    You're right, I left that out. I definitely believe we need to cut that spending. I can think of two great ways to do it:

    End the goddamn war.
    Legalize it.

    Our country will be great again!
    When Jesus said "Love your enemies" he probably didn't mean kill them...

    "Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead. No, wait, not me, you." -Deep Toughts, Jack Handy
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    down_ski wrote:
    Democrats raise taxes, thats what they do
    ...
    This is true.
    What is also true... Republicans don't raise taxes...
    BUT, BOTH spend like crazy.
    ...
    So, think about it like this. In your personal household... is it better to raise more money by sacrificing your time and effort in something like a second job to pay for a 50" Plasma Home Theater in your 3 story Hummer limosine... or just buy the things you cannot afford and pass the bill on to your kids?
    Which one is the 'Personal responsibility' method?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    unsung wrote:
    Anyone who makes over $31k a year is going to be taxed a little more. This is based on the budget vote, on the news right now.
    ...
    Thanx, Rush.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    This is true.
    What is also true... Republicans don't raise taxes...
    BUT, BOTH spend like crazy.
    ...
    So, think about it like this. In your personal household... is it better to raise more money by sacrificing your time and effort in something like a second job to pay for a 50" Plasma Home Theater in your 3 story Hummer limosine... or just buy the things you cannot afford and pass the bill on to your kids?
    Which one is the 'Personal responsibility' method?

    Obviously the 1st one, but that isn't what government does when it raises taxes to spend more money. The better analogy would be a crack head. He needs a bigger fix so he has to go steal more money from working people.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08

Categories