Thread: Why Is Taxing the Rich So Hard?

Originally Posted by ConLib

Why the middle class and poor continue to allow this, really does amaze me, and why the GOP masses buy into this nonsense merely shows their desire to be led around by the nose-ring of the rich and powerful.

And we have today's blind partisan GOP hate rant... however there is some merit to this one. But, only with respect to the GOP being blind to what will really do something deficit speaking wise. The budget offered by the GOP is truly a terrible joke and typically partisan in wealth protection over any sense of fiscal responsibility. Problem is your Obama and fellow Democrats do not have it right either no matter how long he claims "we inherited it." Very little coming from Obama and crew that means little else but continued large deficits for a very long time. Big government, big spending, big taxes, big borrowing, and in the end a big waste of time. Until someone up on the hill has the balls to stand up and say we need the temporary tax cuts to expire, level the tax code playing field a little bit, kill off some tax loopholes, and slash spending across the board (defense, everything) we are wasting our time and doing nothing but adding to our debt in a very partisan way.

As to why the middle class and poor continue to allow this, well for one they pay little to nothing in taxes. Your little idea of only hitting the rich is popular, Obama will always have "Paul's" support in robbing "Peter." However, eventually enough people will wake up and realize everyone, not just your target of the wealthy, is going to have to pay a little something to get us out of this mess. And, it will mean a little fiscal conservative (really fiscal responsibility) cutting of spending as well, enough to make both parties walk away with real political loss. Something you claim by your signature and name that you are but clearly you are no where near.

Originally Posted by Sluggo

And we have today's blind partisan GOP hate rant... however there is some merit to this one. But, only with respect to the GOP being blind to what will really do something deficit speaking wise. The budget offered by the GOP is truly a terrible joke and typically partisan in wealth protection over any sense of fiscal responsibility. Problem is your Obama and fellow Democrats do not have it right either no matter how long he claims "we inherited it." Very little coming from Obama and crew that means little else but continued large deficits for a very long time. Big government, big spending, big taxes, big borrowing, and in the end a big waste of time. Until someone up on the hill has the balls to stand up and say we need the temporary tax cuts to expire, level the tax code playing field a little bit, kill off some tax loopholes, and slash spending across the board (defense, everything) we are wasting our time and doing nothing but adding to our debt in a very partisan way.

As to why the middle class and poor continue to allow this, well for one they pay little to nothing in taxes. Your little idea of only hitting the rich is popular, Obama will always have "Paul's" support in robbing "Peter." However, eventually enough people will wake up and realize everyone, not just your target of the wealthy, is going to have to pay a little something to get us out of this mess. And, it will mean a little fiscal conservative (really fiscal responsibility) cutting of spending as well, enough to make both parties walk away with real political loss. Something you claim by your signature and name that you are but clearly you are no where near.

I believe many people would agree to pay 3% more tax than what they pay (let's say, if they currently pay $5,000 in tax, they would pay $5,150 in tax after the raise) if it also met that Rush Limbaugh for one would pay an additional $200,000 + in tax, which would really help in lowering the deficit (if all his friends and the top 1% also see that tax increase, or a greater one for those making over $10 millions net a year).

And I am not against making some SMART cuts in programs, especially if "Corporate welfare" programs are cut as much (or more) than "Social welfare" programs.

The problem with the GOP is that they ONLY want to cut "social welfare" programs, and don't want to raise tax on the wealthy, but in fact, the cut in social programs would mean that life is a lot more expensive for those currently receiving some assistance which, wouldn't really be a tax increase, but would certainly come out of their pockets, and would come to the same thing.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

I believe many people would agree to pay 3% more tax than what they pay (let's say, if they currently pay $5,000 in tax, they would pay $5,150 in tax after the raise) if it also met that Rush Limbaugh for one would pay an additional $200,000 + in tax, which would really help in lowering the deficit (if all his friends and the top 1% also see that tax increase, or a greater one for those making over $10 millions net a year).

And I am not against making some SMART cuts in programs, especially if "Corporate welfare" programs are cut as much (or more) than "Social welfare" programs.

The problem with the GOP is that they ONLY want to cut "social welfare" programs, and don't want to raise tax on the wealthy, but in fact, the cut in social programs would mean that life is a lot more expensive for those currently receiving some assistance which, wouldn't really be a tax increase, but would certainly come out of their pockets, and would come to the same thing.

Would the person not paying anything agree to pay 3%? 47% of all filers pay nothing. Now THAT would close the revenue gap.

As for the rest of your post... it remains fact free not the least of which we have posted here over and over... even if you took ALL the income from the top 1% and yes that would be billions it would by less than 10% of the deficit this year.

Why the middle class and poor continue to allow this, really does amaze me, and why the GOP masses buy into this nonsense merely shows their desire to be led around by the nose-ring of the rich and powerful.

The Public Overwhelmingly Wants It: Why Is Taxing the Rich So Hard? | Economy | AlterNet

The obvious answer is that rich people have political clout—but can it really be so simple? A growing mound of evidence suggests that while wealthy people’s preferences may not be the only factor in political decision-making, it’s a worrisomely important one. In a recent study, Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels found that senators outright ignored the views of their least advantaged constituents while catering to the preferences of the wealthy. Princeton’s Martin Gilens has also found that policy changes reflect the preferences of the most affluent, while the preferences of poor and middle-income Americans have almost no bearing.

Politicial scientists Lawrence Jacobs and Benjamin Page have found that the preferences of foreign policymakers correspond more to the preferences of executives of multinational companies than to the general public. Page and Jeffrey Winters estimate that the top 10 percent of income earners hold about 90 percent of materially based political power, and that “each member of the top 1 percent averaged more than 100 times the power of a member of the bottom 90 percent; about 200 times if the index is calculated in terms of the more politically relevant non-home wealth.” These numbers are staggering, and should be seriously troubling to anyone who thinks political equality worth defending. Indeed, by Page and Winter’s definition of oligarchy as “the extreme political inequalities that necessarily accompany extreme material inequalities,” it’s pretty hard to argue that the United States isn’t an oligarchic society.

I think the answer is more complicated that it may appear. Bear in mind we did tax the wealthy at a very high rate from 1936 till 1980, but with the election of Reagan it all changed. The election prior pitted Jimmy Carter, a deeply religious man, against Gerald Ford, and it was the first time in recent history that religion played a major part in an election. The very next election had "family values" and other "religious" so called "issues". The "value" that has stuck is lower taxes for the wealthy, that is more important than any issue. There continues to be "wedge" issues that get "single issue" voters to the booths. Abortion, Gay Marriage,Gun Control and so called "freedom of religion" have dominated every national election since 1980. It is a brilliant political strategy, get the middle class, even some of the lower middle class, to carry the political water for the very rich.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Would the person not paying anything agree to pay 3%? 47% of all filers pay nothing. Now THAT would close the revenue gap.

As for the rest of your post... it remains fact free not the least of which we have posted here over and over... even if you took ALL the income from the top 1% and yes that would be billions it would by less than 10% of the deficit this year.

So you think it's unfair to ask the people who own 60% of the country to pay more, preferring to put the burden on the people who own 1% of the country.

No seriously, that's your beef?

Originally Posted by goober

So you think it's unfair to ask the people who own 60% of the country to pay more, preferring to put the burden on the people who own 1% of the country.

No seriously, that's your beef?

Who are the employers?

What you want, is production, without people able to produce.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Would the person not paying anything agree to pay 3%? 47% of all filers pay nothing. Now THAT would close the revenue gap.

As for the rest of your post... it remains fact free not the least of which we have posted here over and over... even if you took ALL the income from the top 1% and yes that would be billions it would by less than 10% of the deficit this year.

If you are soooo envious of people making so little money that they don't pay any tax, why don't you change place with them?

I am certain that anyone not paying any tax because their income is so low would be MORE than happy to pay 40 or even 50% tax if they should suddenly find themselves making $500,000 or $10 millions dollars a year.

And, by the way, even people whose income is so low that they don't pay any INCOME tax, pay tax. Tax on gas, tax on food (in many states), tax on clothing, tax on transportation, tax on cigarette (if they can afford to smoke).

But, obviously, you feel that those people making under $25,000 a year with 2 or 3 kids to raise are VERY LUCKY because they don't pay tax, while we should REALLY feel sorry for those poor guys who are making over $1 million a year, because (after all their deductions) they are paying close to $ 200,000 in taxes, and ONLY have a mere $800,000 net income to take home!

Yes. that makes a lot of sense!

Originally Posted by goober

So you think it's unfair to ask the people who own 60% of the country to pay more, preferring to put the burden on the people who own 1% of the country.

No seriously, that's your beef?

Lets put it this way, the people that own 1% of the country can only use 1% of the country. Put another way if you can only afford a small house that's all you have to live in and you only get to use 1% of the benefits this country provides.

But that's not how it work, 45% of Americans pay no taxes yet receive all the goodies and benefits of those that pay the bills for all the things government provides. Like Roads, firemen, police, public schools, school lunches, free bus rids, food stamps, all their medical etc etc they pay nothing for.

Its not hard. We already get half our revenue from them.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

If you are soooo envious of people making so little money that they don't pay any tax, why don't you change place with them?

I am certain that anyone not paying any tax because their income is so low would be MORE than happy to pay 40 or even 50% tax if they should suddenly find themselves making $500,000 or $10 millions dollars a year.

And, by the way, even people whose income is so low that they don't pay any INCOME tax, pay tax. Tax on gas, tax on food (in many states), tax on clothing, tax on transportation, tax on cigarette (if they can afford to smoke).

But, obviously, you feel that those people making under $25,000 a year with 2 or 3 kids to raise are VERY LUCKY because they don't pay tax, while we should REALLY feel sorry for those poor guys who are making over $1 million a year, because (after all their deductions) they are paying close to $ 200,000 in taxes, and ONLY have a mere $800,000 net income to take home!

Yes. that makes a lot of sense!

Dear... It's your class envy that's showing...

Originally Posted by Forplay

Lets put it this way, the people that own 1% of the country can only use 1% of the country. Put another way if you can only afford a small house that's all you have to live in and you only get to use 1% of the benefits this country provides.

But that's not how it work, 45% of Americans pay no taxes yet receive all the goodies and benefits of those that pay the bills for all the things government provides. Like Roads, firemen, police, public schools, school lunches, free bus rids, food stamps, all their medical etc etc they pay nothing for.

You keep making ridiculous statements that really make you look even more ignorant than I think you are.
There aren't 45% of Americans that pay no taxes, only a clueless idiot would make that statement, oh sorry, well, you've had it pointed out to you a couple of times now.

Nearly everyone pays federal taxes, they pay excise taxes, taxes are included in the cost of most everything, and if they work they pay payroll taxes even if they don't pay income tax.
And they pay sales tax and they pay real estate tax, or rent to someone who pays real estate tax, that pays for police and fire and schools.

Now, I know you've never had to make an executive decision in your life, but when you have to put something in place that works, you can't go by the stupid dogma you hear on the radio. You need to look at what will really work.
Raising taxes on the highest brackets to what they were back when the deficits weren't such a big problem, will work, it did before, it works in other countries, it will work here.
Cutting spending doesn't work, we just went through a "big spending cutting deal", and they cut 350 million from this years budget.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Dear... It's your class envy that's showing...

And what class would that be, dear?

Once again, you are assuming a lot. . .therefore making an ass of yourself! :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Sadanie

And what class would that be, dear?

Once again, you are assuming a lot. . .therefore making an ass of yourself! :rolleyes:

So tell me... which minority are you?