To reduce the debt, would you support a tax hike for rich?
Comments
-
0
-
exactly.Davidtrios wrote:
if the situation was as urgent as everyone says it is, they must raise revenues.
but people are unwilling to do that.
there can never ever be any sort of a balanced approach..."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Why not raise taxes the same way budget reduction plans are laid out? You know, propose a 10 year plan to increase taxes and then never do it.gimmesometruth27 wrote:
exactly.Davidtrios wrote:
if the situation was as urgent as everyone says it is, they must raise revenues.
but people are unwilling to do that.
there can never ever be any sort of a balanced approach...
But I'm guessing they will start taking money the first day they can instead of waiting for several years to start phasing the tax increases in.
Isn't it odd that cutting spending takes 10 years while taking money takes 1 day?Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
0
-
as i recall the bush tax cuts took effect immediately. over the span of a few months everyone got their checks...Jason P wrote:
Why not raise taxes the same way budget reduction plans are laid out? You know, propose a 10 year plan to increase taxes and then never do it.gimmesometruth27 wrote:
exactly.Davidtrios wrote:
if the situation was as urgent as everyone says it is, they must raise revenues.
but people are unwilling to do that.
there can never ever be any sort of a balanced approach...
But I'm guessing they will start taking money the first day they can instead of waiting for several years to start phasing the tax increases in.
Isn't it odd that cutting spending takes 10 years while taking money takes 1 day?"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."
-Leona Helmsley
how the rich people beat the irs...
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04 ... arts-graph"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
No. I do think the tax laws need to be completely rewritten though. There should be s flat rate with no subsidies or breaks for anyone or company.0
-
what the hell are they doing appointing a 12 person supercommittee to cut spending???
they need an odd number because you know votes are going to be 6-6 and they need a tie breaker....
on second thought, it will probably mostly be votes of 7-5 or 8-4 because you know that the 6 republicans will vote together and at least 1 maybe 2 dems are going to compromise because they are wussies and appeasers..."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
gimmesometruth27 wrote:what the hell are they doing appointing a 12 person supercommittee to cut spending???
they need an odd number because you know votes are going to be 6-6 and they need a tie breaker....
on second thought, it will probably mostly be votes of 7-5 or 8-4 because you know that the 6 republicans will vote together and at least 1 maybe 2 dems are going to compromise because they are wussies and appeasers...
Here you go again cutting down compromise.
hippiemom = goodness0 -
Thoughts_Arrive wrote:Prince Of Dorkness wrote:Thoughts_Arrive wrote:What if that rich person got rich through hard work?
Why should he pay more tax?
So the people who work minimum wage don't work hard too?
Obviously not.
Did they go to university and study hard enough so that they don't end up in some dead end minimum wage job? Nah didn't think so.
Too many jealous people out there, the rich people got to where they are though study and hard work.
you have a very narrow view. i know many people with university degrees who due to downturn in the economy are working at coffee shops making close to nothing. you also have to look at new comers who make less money due to other issues such as not having English as there first language.
another thing that most people fail to see is that in reality our system needs people making minimum wage. can you imagine if everyone was making a living wage, peopel would go crazy about the prices of things.0 -
There would me a lot more people employed if there was no minimum wage.fife wrote:you have a very narrow view. i know many people with university degrees who due to downturn in the economy are working at coffee shops making close to nothing. you also have to look at new comers who make less money due to other issues such as not having English as there first language.
another thing that most people fail to see is that in reality our system needs people making minimum wage. can you imagine if everyone was making a living wage, peopel would go crazy about the prices of things.
Define living wage...0 -
Blockhead wrote:
There would me a lot more people employed if there was no minimum wage.fife wrote:you have a very narrow view. i know many people with university degrees who due to downturn in the economy are working at coffee shops making close to nothing. you also have to look at new comers who make less money due to other issues such as not having English as there first language.
another thing that most people fail to see is that in reality our system needs people making minimum wage. can you imagine if everyone was making a living wage, peopel would go crazy about the prices of things.
Define living wage...
Your right more people would be employed, of course they would make alot less now than now but eh at least they have a job :roll:
a living wage is a wage in which people can afford the necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing and health care. i believe that the state of Maryland has that.0 -
are you saying that someone employed would make alot less than someone not employed??? Are you saying the only benefits to having a job is pay? What about healthcare?fife wrote:Blockhead wrote:
There would me a lot more people employed if there was no minimum wage.fife wrote:you have a very narrow view. i know many people with university degrees who due to downturn in the economy are working at coffee shops making close to nothing. you also have to look at new comers who make less money due to other issues such as not having English as there first language.
another thing that most people fail to see is that in reality our system needs people making minimum wage. can you imagine if everyone was making a living wage, peopel would go crazy about the prices of things.
Define living wage...
Your right more people would be employed, of course they would make alot less now than now but eh at least they have a job :roll:
a living wage is a wage in which people can afford the necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing and health care. i believe that the state of Maryland has that.
Well your view on welfare and your definition of living wage are contradictory.
Your definition of of living wage (food/shelter/clothing/healthcare) are all given for free to people who don't work... So why are you complaing about people not making a living wage if everything you think people need is given for free to people who don't earn any wage...0 -
[[/quote]
There would me a lot more people employed if there was no minimum wage.
Define living wage...[/quote]
Your right more people would be employed, of course they would make alot less now than now but eh at least they have a job :roll:
a living wage is a wage in which people can afford the necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing and health care. i believe that the state of Maryland has that.[/quote]
are you saying that someone employed would make alot less than someone not employed??? Are you saying the only benefits to having a job is pay? What about healthcare?
Well your view on welfare and your definition of living wage are contradictory.
Your definition of of living wage (food/shelter/clothing/healthcare) are all given for free to people who don't work... So why are you complaing about people not making a living wage if everything you think people need is given for free to people who don't earn any wage...[/quote]
don't know where to start. you do know that there are people working low paying jobs who are not on welfare and if you gave the business the power to say "eh, remember that mim. wage thing screw it, pay what you want" how many of those business you think would still pay their people that mim. wage? i would say alot less. no money is not the only benefit of a job but it is a big and most important one. health care is important but if you don't have enough money to pay for things like housing and food your fucked.0 -
There would me a lot more people employed if there was no minimum wage.fife wrote:
Define living wage...[/quote]
Your right more people would be employed, of course they would make alot less now than now but eh at least they have a job :roll:
a living wage is a wage in which people can afford the necessities of life such as food, shelter, clothing and health care. i believe that the state of Maryland has that.[/quote]
are you saying that someone employed would make alot less than someone not employed??? Are you saying the only benefits to having a job is pay? What about healthcare?
Well your view on welfare and your definition of living wage are contradictory.
Your definition of of living wage (food/shelter/clothing/healthcare) are all given for free to people who don't work... So why are you complaing about people not making a living wage if everything you think people need is given for free to people who don't earn any wage...[/quote]
don't know where to start. you do know that there are people working low paying jobs who are not on welfare and if you gave the business the power to say "eh, remember that mim. wage thing screw it, pay what you want" how many of those business you think would still pay their people that mim. wage? i would say alot less. no money is not the only benefit of a job but it is a big and most important one. health care is important but if you don't have enough money to pay for things like housing and food your fucked.[/quote]
Are we not able to choose which jobs we apply for/work at? No one is forced to work somewhere, especially if they think that they are being underpaid.
Why would a buisness get rid / underpay dependable workers. It would be a good thing, like a check & balances, people would be more motivated/competative/unique, isn't that what the free market it all about?
why do you need money for housing/food Isn't that whats the gov. for, providing housing, food?0 -
from yesterday...
why is everyone so hell bent on protecting 3% of the population, or the top 2 tax brackets, from paying an increase of 3.6% and 2% respectively?
Tax hike on the rich would impact just 3% of taxpayers
By Blake Ellis August 11, 2011: 1:51 PM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/11/pf/tax_ ... /index.htm
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- As the government looks for ways to climb out of its massive hole of debt, all eyes are on the rich.
President Obama and many of his fellow Democrats continue to call for higher taxes on the wealthy. And, according to results of a CNN/ORC International Poll released Wednesday, many Americans agree that it's the only way the country can dig itself out of its current economic mess.
In the survey, 63% of the 1,008 people interviewed over the phone said they think the new bipartisan committee in charge of deficit reduction (required under the recent debt ceiling agreement) should raise taxes on higher-income Americans and businesses.
But just how many rich people are there? And are there enough of them for a tax increase to really make a dent in the United States' trillions of dollars in debt?
President Obama has defined the nation's wealthy as those who make $200,000 or more a year.
According to a recent report from the Internal Revenue Service, that leaves out about 97% of the tax-paying population.
The report, which provides a complete breakdown and analysis of returns for the 2009 tax year, found that only a mere 3% of tax returns were filed by people earning a gross adjusted income of $200,000 or more.
Americans earning $1 million or more were even more rare, comprising just 0.2% of total tax filers and accounting for a mere 236,883 of the 140 million tax returns received in 2009.
The wealthiest taxpayers -- those earning $10 million or more in adjusted gross income -- are even less prevalent. There were only 8,274 people belonging to that elite club, according the IRS.
Out of the nearly 4 million "rich" people making more than $200,000 a year, 1,470 didn't pay any income tax whatsoever in 2009. But the people who did pay taxes earned a total of nearly $2 trillion in income -- about 26% of total taxpayer income in 2009.
President Obama's tax proposals -- which many Republican's call "job-killing" tax hikes -- include getting rid of some corporate tax breaks enjoyed by oil and gas companies and corporate jet buyers, and restoring some Bush-era tax rates for high-income households. If the Bush tax cuts expire as planned in 2012, the top two income tax rates will revert to 39.6% and 36% from 35% and 33%, respectively.
Yet, even though these high-income earners are a minority, Obama says the proposed tax increases would boost revenue by $750 billion over a decade.
It's not quite the multi-trillion figure the U.S. needs to pay off the deficit, but for many of those who responded to the CNN/ORC International poll it's evidently a good enough start.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Two reasons come to mind:gimmesometruth27 wrote:why is everyone so hell bent on protecting 3% of the population, or the top 2 tax brackets, from paying an increase of 3.6% and 2% respectively?
1. they already pay over half of all the taxes already right?
2. When do the increases stop? 3.6% now, another 2% in 5 years...etc.0 -
don't know where to start. you do know that there are people working low paying jobs who are not on welfare and if you gave the business the power to say "eh, remember that mim. wage thing screw it, pay what you want" how many of those business you think would still pay their people that mim. wage? i would say alot less. no money is not the only benefit of a job but it is a big and most important one. health care is important but if you don't have enough money to pay for things like housing and food your fucked.[/quote]
Are we not able to choose which jobs we apply for/work at? No one is forced to work somewhere, especially if they think that they are being underpaid.
Why would a buisness get rid / underpay dependable workers. It would be a good thing, like a check & balances, people would be more motivated/competative/unique, isn't that what the free market it all about?
why do you need money for housing/food Isn't that whats the gov. for, providing housing, food?[/quote]
yes everyone can pick their jobs but not every job is open. was it not you who wrote in another tread "where are the jobs Mr. President"? new comers who enter the united States face many barrier in the work force and then have to settle for the jobs that pay very little. these jobs tend to be low skill jobs that can be done easily by many people. we are talking about the poor not the middle class here.
now why would business drop workers or try to pay them less? i don't know lets ask those companies that fire people in America and send those jobs overseas.
as for your last point, again their are people who are poor not receiving welfare and don't get housing and food but i know it easier to pick on welfare people.0 -
any thought on the article how the majority of those polled agree with the majority of us on here that they should pay more?usamamasan1 wrote:
Two reasons come to mind:gimmesometruth27 wrote:why is everyone so hell bent on protecting 3% of the population, or the top 2 tax brackets, from paying an increase of 3.6% and 2% respectively?
1. they already pay over half of all the taxes already right?
2. When do the increases stop? 3.6% now, another 2% in 5 years...etc.
the top 2 tax rates are 36% and 33%. how can the number of wealthy pay over half of what is paid with those tax rates? they can afford to pay more to help dig us out of the hole, and they should.
why do you care so much about the bazillionires"
they are hoarding what they make. they are not spending it. they are not creating jobs. their free ride on the bush tax cuts is over.
we need revenue and spending cuts."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
they are not hoarding the cash, they are reserving it for a friendly climate to do business in. One with less uncertaintly and one where the risk reward ratio is better in balance. Without it, they take their toys away from the playground. Nobody get sheet.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help