Archive

Another Obama Lie: The Rich Don't Pay Less Taxes

  • Writerbuckeye
    How did lowering taxes not work during most of Bush's tenure? Tax receipts were up and the economy was fine until all those bad real estate loans hit the fan. The economy tanking had nothing to do with what Bush did on taxes.

    By the way, where are you getting the idea I want Obama to lower taxes right now? I've said nothing of the kind. I just want him to not raise them until we see some very specific and REAL cuts. Then if they want to raise taxes on EVERYONE with the funds earmarked to deficit reduction, I'd have no problem with that.

    Until proven otherwise, I believe any tax increase will only end up going toward more spending with no real reductions taking place. Why? Because that's how the federal government has been doing things forever under both parties, and I don't see it changing unless forced to do so.
  • gut
    Writerbuckeye;912878 wrote: Until proven otherwise, I believe any tax increase will only end up going toward more spending with no real reductions taking place. Why? Because that's how the federal government has been doing things forever under both parties, and I don't see it changing unless forced to do so.
    If you look at Europe, or even Canada, they spend 40-50% of GDP. Now I don't know if that is inclusive or exclusive of govt spending, but in the US this would be between 25-35%, depending on how you calculate it But you are exactly right about new taxes just going to more spending - Europe and Canada demonstrates that if our own govt hasn't already convinced you this is the case.

    And we can't just tax the rich and corporations as govt spending continues to spiral out-of-control. Because another key difference with Europe is EVERYONE has much higher taxes. They have a consumption tax (VAT) ranging from 15-19% roughly, and I want to say their "FICA" contribution is 8-10% higher than ours (counting employer match), as well. Those two numbers will never fly with any taxpayer. But many are happy to continue squeezing the govt teet so long as the rich and corporations pay for it, which is of course unsustainable.
  • stlouiedipalma
    I stand by my previous statement about nothing changing even if we completely eliminated taxes on the top 1 to 2%.

    The mantra of Republicans has been that if we increase taxes on these people it will prevent them from creating new jobs. Forgive me if I am wrong, but they aren't creating any jobs at their current rate, which hasn't gone up since the tax cuts were enacted in the last decade (by a Republican President and Republican Congress; their names are left out to prevent writer from taking his ball and running home). I don't want to hear that "uncertainty" B.S. either. Boehner used it last year when the subject of extending these tax cuts came up. As far as I'm concerned, the "uncertainty" is gone. That argument has been used and is no longer valid.

    My point has been, and still is, about how average income Republicans can continue to embrace trickle-down economics. It's been over 30 years since this principle was championed by Republicans and it still isn't working.
  • jhay78
    stlouiedipalma;913210 wrote:My point has been, and still is, about how average income Republicans can continue to embrace trickle-down economics. It's been over 30 years since this principle was championed by Republicans and it still isn't working.
    It's been over 70 years since the New Deal was proven to be a miserable failure, yet the Left embraces its pillars and even wants to expand upon them.

    And I don't think you've addressed the nearly 50% of Americans who have no federal income tax liability. Why the obsession with how much the rich/millionaires/bilionaires/top 1-2% are being taxed? Does it put an extra bounce in your step knowing that some rich guy would be getting taxed at 45% instead of 35%?
  • stlouiedipalma
    No it doesn't put a bounce in my step at all, it's the fact that the guy making $40,000 a year really believes that lowering the tax rate on the super-wealthy will somehow, someway put more money in his pocket and allow him to prosper.

    Both sides of this argument tell lies to further their agenda and the voting public sucks it down like manna. They both prey on the fears of the average American. It's just a matter of who sells their brand of BS the best. I think when all is said and done the average American voter is gullible at best and downright stupid at worst.

    Unfortunately, class warfare is something which both sides of the argument use all too regularly. Arguing that someone needs to pay a higher tax rate is no better than claiming that public employees are to blame for the state of the economy. The real truth is that we, the public, are to blame for allowing them to shove their agendas down our throats.
  • gut
    stlouiedipalma;913320 wrote:No it doesn't put a bounce in my step at all, it's the fact that the guy making $40,000 a year really believes that lowering the tax rate on the super-wealthy will somehow, someway put more money in his pocket and allow him to prosper.
    The problem is, almost regardless of the tax rate, the govt generally collects about 18% of GDP, give or take a point. The idea that we can redistribute wealth through taxation is pretty much bullshit. And the "trickle down" mantra is a misguided argument. Everyone can get a piece of a bigger pie, even if the rich's slice grows faster than yours. But when you choke off growth with taxes and misguided policy, guess what, you get "trickle away" with the rich making up for their losses by taking some of your pie.

    The gap between rich and poor is not relevant, you have to look at the standard of living vs. prior generations and vis-a-vis that of other countries. Yeah, the last 20 years or so we aren't fairing too well. Probably not coincidental that we've seen a massive expansion of government in that time frame. It's the same thing we've seen with Europe, the weight of govt crushing growth and more mouths to feed from a smaller pie. The govt destroys more wealth than it can redistribute, and no matter how many times we see this demonstrated people ignorantly believe this time will be different.
  • believer
    gut;913896 wrote:The problem is, almost regardless of the tax rate, the govt generally collects about 18% of GDP, give or take a point. The idea that we can redistribute wealth through taxation is pretty much bullshit. And the "trickle down" mantra is a misguided argument. Everyone can get a piece of a bigger pie, even if the rich's slice grows faster than yours. But when you choke off growth with taxes and misguided policy, guess what, you get "trickle away" with the rich making up for their losses by taking some of your pie.

    The gap between rich and poor is not relevant, you have to look at the standard of living vs. prior generations and vis-a-vis that of other countries. Yeah, the last 20 years or so we aren't fairing too well. Probably not coincidental that we've seen a massive expansion of government in that time frame. It's the same thing we've seen with Europe, the weight of govt crushing growth and more mouths to feed from a smaller pie. The govt destroys more wealth than it can redistribute, and no matter how many times we see this demonstrated people ignorantly believe this time will be different.
    Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Einstein

    I wholeheartedly agree with the opinion that we have to stop focusing on the tried and true leftist talking point "the rich keep getting richer" when the real issue is standard of living or quality of life.

    America's "poor" are overweight (well at least they eat well), receive great health care at little or no cost, watch soaps on their HD wide screen televisions via low-cost government subsidized utility bills in their gubmint subsidized housing, and text each other on their gubmint subsidized cell phones allegedly provided to assist them with finding jobs.

    America's middle and working class continue to fill the shopping malls and flock to Best Buy for the latest electronic gadgets even in tough economic times.

    Ask our grandparents and great-grandparents what it was like to live through the Great Depression as compared to what the average American "suffers" in today's economic climate and I'm confident they'd be more than happy to explain the differences to us.

    There are times when I almost wish we had suffered more than some lost 401K earnings and a couple of years worth of unemployment checks to get a true dose of economic reality, but I digress.

    Some would claim that the reason we haven't suffered similar economic hardships or a Great Depression II is BECAUSE of the confiscatory wealth redistribution tax policies we now have in place. Perhaps to a degree, but I would argue that the downside to those policies is the slow erosion of American manufacturing jobs and anemic economic growth in an alleged "recovery."
  • QuakerOats
    stlouiedipalma;913210 wrote:I don't want to hear that "uncertainty" B.S. either. Boehner used it last year when the subject of extending these tax cuts came up. As far as I'm concerned, the "uncertainty" is gone. That argument has been used and is no longer valid.
    Bul#%&$ There is so much uncertainty out there right now that no one in their right mind would risk capital unless absolutely necessary, especially small businesses which do the job creating.

    No one can project the cost of human capital, especially with obamaKare looming, and obama's radical NLRB running roughshod over business.

    No one can project future costs because they have no idea what their taxes are going to be, they just know they are headed higher.

    No one can project the cost of compliance because there are so many massive regulations pouring out of this radical administration that it is hard to keep track of, let alone put future costs on them.

    No one can project the future cost of energy because this administration is hell bent on shutting down the energy producers and putting off limits our own resources, all to placate the radical environmental (aka Marxist) movement.

    If you don't think there is real uncertainty in this economy that business people are grappling with every day, then your head is simply buried so far in the sand that there is no help for you.

    Good day.
  • Writerbuckeye
    When the head of Coca Cola says China has a more business friendly regulation and tax system than the US, you know we're in trouble. It's no longer just about whether to cut or increase taxes, it's about a tax code that is strangling both business and individuals under the weight of its own excess.
  • QuakerOats
    We have federal bureaucrats at NLRB and EPA and elsewhere making end runs around elected legislators at the behest of a radical administration in order to shut down capitalism as we know it. And you now have the president employing the communist strategy of divide and conquer --- rich vs. poor; blacks vs. whites; liberals vs. conservatives; muslims vs. Jews; union vs. non-union; public sector vs. private sector. Has any 'leader' ever divided this nation more? It is no secret why we have arrived at economic peril; the only question is can we survive until Nov '12?
  • jhay78
    believer;913952 wrote:Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Einstein

    I wholeheartedly agree with the opinion that we have to stop focusing on the tried and true leftist talking point "the rich keep getting richer" when the real issue is standard of living or quality of life.

    America's "poor" are overweight (well at least they eat well), receive great health care at little or no cost, watch soaps on their HD wide screen televisions via low-cost government subsidized utility bills in their gubmint subsidized housing, and text each other on their gubmint subsidized cell phones allegedly provided to assist them with finding jobs.

    America's middle and working class continue to fill the shopping malls and flock to Best Buy for the latest electronic gadgets even in tough economic times.

    Ask our grandparents and great-grandparents what it was like to live through the Great Depression as compared to what the average American "suffers" in today's economic climate and I'm confident they'd be more than happy to explain the differences to us.
    You nailed the whole quality of life thing. Go stand in front of Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target, etc, early on the morning of Black Friday and tell me how much the average American is suffering.
    There are times when I almost wish we has suffered more than some lost 401K earnings and a couple of years worth of unemployment checks to get a true dose of economic reality, but I digress.

    Some would claim that the reason we haven't suffered similar economic hardships or a Great Depression II is BECAUSE of the confiscatory wealth redistribution tax policies we now have in place. Perhaps to a degree, but I would argue that the downside to those policies is the slow erosion of American manufacturing jobs and anemic economic growth in an alleged "recovery
    In the 1930's we had bread lines. Today we have 99 weeks of unemployment compensation to mask the real problems.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    "You nailed the whole quality of life thing. Go stand in front of Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target, etc, early on the morning of Black Friday and tell me how much the average American is suffering."

    Or a new video game system or Apple product launch.
  • gut
    Manhattan Buckeye;915435 wrote:"You nailed the whole quality of life thing. Go stand in front of Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target, etc, early on the morning of Black Friday and tell me how much the average American is suffering."

    Or a new video game system or Apple product launch.
    When I see all those people lined up waiting outside the Apple store for hours, I wonder how many called in "sick"....or simply don't have a job to go to.
  • QuakerOats
    Why wait in line at Apple, you can get a free phone sent to you if you receive any kind of federal assistance, with free minutes of course. I saw the brochure. Are we really that @$#%ed up?

    Change we can believe in ....
  • gut
    QuakerOats;915756 wrote:Why wait in line at Apple, you can get a free phone sent to you if you receive any kind of federal assistance, with free minutes of course. I saw the brochure. Are we really that @$#%ed up?

    Change we can believe in ....
    But you don't get the sweet, sweet Apple...you get some crappy low-end Android phone :)
  • Footwedge
    Apparently Warren Buffet thinks otherwise....and agrees with Obama.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html
  • believer
    Footwedge;916650 wrote:Apparently Warren Buffet thinks otherwise....and agrees with Obama.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html
    He writes this article for the NY Slimes (LMAO) and he already had his head up Barry's ass.

    I'll give Buffet credit for his billionaire philanthropy (I guess), but if Uncle Warren wants to shell out more of his billions so the Feds can squander his money, he should do so by all means.
  • tk421
    Uncle Warren is a fucking hypocrite, because he knows that his salary is like what, $100,000? Uncle Warren makes all his money on capital gains, just like most extremely rich people. Him calling for higher taxes on the rich is pure liberal posturing, that's it. He gets to look good in the media while knowing 100% that his taxes aren't going to go up a single percentage point.

    The media likes to point to that stupid story about how his secretary pays more in taxes while ignoring the fact that he doesn't get a super huge salary like most CEOs and get's his money in capital gains, which is taxed way less than anyone making decent money at his firm. He's full of shit, end of story.

    IF Warren Buffet wanted to ACTUALLY have the super rich pay more taxes, he would be calling for a capital gains tax rate of 30% or more. Anyone want to bet when this will ever happen? And as Believer pointed out, the tax return forms have a section to send extra money to the IRS if you so desire, no one is stopping him from paying his "fair" share.
  • wkfan
    tk421;916718 wrote:IF Warren Buffet wanted to ACTUALLY have the super rich pay more taxes, he would be calling for a capital gains tax rate of 30% or more.
    A crap-ton more people than just the 'super-rich' have capital gains.
  • dwccrew
    wkfan;916833 wrote:A crap-ton more people than just the 'super-rich' have capital gains.
    I don't think tk421 ever said the only people that pay capital gains are the super rich, just that that is how most of the money is made for the super rich.
  • wkfan
    dwccrew;916840 wrote:I don't think tk421 ever said the only people that pay capital gains are the super rich, just that that is how most of the money is made for the super rich.
    While your statement may be true, it is reckless to think that increasing the capital gains tax would be a good idea and not harm Joe Average.

    Thinking like this (not understanding the full picture and all consequences of decisions being made) is one reason that we are in the mess that we are in.
  • Writerbuckeye
    Buffet is no better than a con artist on this issue. He knows full well that the way he gets his income will likely not face higher taxes because of there reasons already cited: too many "regular" folks would be hurt if this happened.

    It's too bad be have a lapdog media that refuses to do its job by continuing to provide an unchallenged forum for Buffet and his disingenuous tax tale.

    Some media have already debunked this by clearly showing that under normal tax structure, those making more money get taxed at higher rates -- but he's still allowed to spew this crap in a lot of venues with no fact checking.

    Of course, this all feeds Obama's class warfare rhetoric, as disgusting as it is.
  • QuakerOats
    Will the liberal hypocrite publish his tax return? No.

    What a phony charade.
  • jhay78
    tk421;916718 wrote:Uncle Warren is a ****ing hypocrite, because he knows that his salary is like what, $100,000? Uncle Warren makes all his money on capital gains, just like most extremely rich people. Him calling for higher taxes on the rich is pure liberal posturing, that's it. He gets to look good in the media while knowing 100% that his taxes aren't going to go up a single percentage point.

    The media likes to point to that stupid story about how his secretary pays more in taxes while ignoring the fact that he doesn't get a super huge salary like most CEOs and get's his money in capital gains, which is taxed way less than anyone making decent money at his firm. He's full of ****, end of story.

    IF Warren Buffet wanted to ACTUALLY have the super rich pay more taxes, he would be calling for a capital gains tax rate of 30% or more. Anyone want to bet when this will ever happen? And as Believer pointed out, the tax return forms have a section to send extra money to the IRS if you so desire, no one is stopping him from paying his "fair" share.
    Reps . . . great post.
  • fish82
    Buffett has been completely and thoroughly debunked on this issue...to the point where he's starting to sound like some senile old man. Couple that with the segment of you people continuing to hump his leg causes me to smh.