A pliant press swallows the White House story line: the great compromiser (“clearly exasperated,” sympathized a Post news story) being stymied by Republican “intransigence” (the noun actually used in another front-page Post news story to describe the Republican position on taxes).It's one of the cards in his hand as he dares you to call his bluff.
July 15, 2011
Krauthammer is irked that Obama's "Olympian above-the-fray no-politics-here pose is succeeding."
Well, yes:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
273 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 273 of 273Joe - "I assert that raising taxes will NOT increase revenue and will further hurt job creation..."
George W. Bush, along with a Republican-dominated Congress, passed THREE tax cuts, bringing the tax burden on the top 1% to the lowest level in history.
Presumably because all that save income would trickle jobs all around the country.
But the first net job created by the Bush tax cuts did not come until the second quarter of 2005.
His net jobs created in eight years?
One million jobs.
Clinton raised taxes on the rich modestly while lowering them for the other 95% of the country, and by the end of his FIRST TERM IN OFFICE he created 12 million jobs.
By the end of eight years, he had created 23 million.
"We are approaching a time when half the population will not pay Federal Income Tax."
Yes, and this is dangerous.
or I will call you out as a liar the next time you say it
I didn't lie. I said Republicans rejected a 4 trillion deficit reduction deal. You agreed they did - i.e. they didn't want to raise taxes in order to achieve it.
Now retract and apologize.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
You compare Net Jobs to Gross Jobs, and start with Clinton coming in AFTER a Recession and compare him to Bush who began and ended on a Recession…oh BTW, how many NET jobs has Obama created in 2.5 years?
Figures never lie, but LIARS figure….
"Liar!" "Beclown!"
*shaking fists*
Does "fuckface" belong on that list, GM?
Garage: "So tax increases do not cut deficits?"
Raise the capital gains tax rate and you will see, again, that raising the rate does not increase tax revenues (rates and revenues are two different things). Capital gains are a voluntary tax, levied only on the sale of qualifying assets.
You can raise the rate on ordinary income and you might raise revenues but they will not be in the proportion that you think as has been demonstrated repeatedly.
You are a commission guy. If you can delay a commission from one year to the next when that commission might throw you from, say, 235,000 in combined income to 260,000 in combined income and thus into the millionaire and billionaire range, will you not do so? Will you not tap the brakes as it were? Even ordinary rates are subject to behavioral change.
Original Mike - The 50% don't pay taxes canard is nonsense and anybody who has ever takena business course knows it.
The reason for no taxes is directly related to lack of income and of course tax credits related to children, mortgages, and many other aspect of taxable income.
The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property.
Here's how a family making $50,000 pays almost no "income" taxes:
The family is entitled to a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650 apiece, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The federal income tax on $24,000 is $2,769.
With two children younger than 17, the family qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. Its Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly.
The $2,800 in credits exceeds the $2,769 in taxes, so the family makes a $31 profit from the federal income tax.
*Why not take a business course or at least do some research before posting teabagger drivel.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Huzzah! 200 comments and no mention of PALIN!
Just think when PALIN has secured the nomination and we begin to debate PALIN and OBAMA, Althouse’s server’s will melt…
garage mahal said...I didn't lie. I said Republicans rejected a 4 trillion deficit reduction deal.
No you didn't. You're lying again. The original statement is a matter of record. It speaks for itself in words and context and your meaning and intent in writing it in the way you did is clear.
Man up. Retract the statement. Admit that your intention of portraying the republicans as balking at deficit reduction was a lie of admission, and that they do not balk at deficit reduction, but at new taxes.
Or...continue to lie.
Duh: I think the post clearly indicates "Federal Income Tax."
Michael
My accountant gave me good advice. Make more money, let him worry about taxes. Regarding my earnings, I don't quite know how I could tap on the brakes, or bank commissions. When my customers pay, I get paid.
Original Mike - The 50% don't pay taxes canard is nonsense and anybody who has ever takena business course knows it.
Except it isn't a "canard" and nothing you posted demonstrates it is a "canard"
You went on to talk about "other taxes"
Are really this stupid, or just pretending?
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
My accountant gave me good advice. Make more money, let him worry about taxes. Regarding my earnings, I don't quite know how I could tap on the brakes, or bank commissions. When my customers pay, I get paid.
But when you declare your capital gains or when you have your clients pay or when you purchase stuff can affect your tax liability and if you aren’t aware of this, well then you aren’t much of a business man and you need an new accountant.
The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes,
Which of course has nothing to do with them not paying federal income taxes.
You are a clown of the first order. You're dumber than garbage, and he's really, really, stupid.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
My accountant gave me good advice. Make more money, let him worry about taxes.
And uh that’s NOT “good advice” EXCEPT for your accountant….
NO! What's failing is the leadership of McConnell and Boehner. Though McConnell is the weaker of the two. And, he makes Harry Reid look like a film star.
Why is no one (EXCEPT SARAH PALIN!) able to form an argument that people hear. Listen to. And, agree with?
Obama is a liar.
That's not gonna get in the way of his sales pitch!
And, ya know what? Obama "tested" this message! As did Bill Clinton test messages ... when he said "he didn't have sex with that woman."
And, today lots of people know when Bill Clinton gets an erection ... it doesn't come out straight.
Everybody also knows Obama doesn't have his birth certificate slapped to his forehead.
What do you want?
You want Obama to come on stage and fall down dead drunk? Well, it won't happen. Though Boehner could.
I've never seen so many lemmings trying to fool ALL the Ameican people ALL AT ONCE!
It is funny to watch these incoherent leftists post time & time that Reagan raised taxes while of course ignoring (as it isn't convenient right now) that the deficit & debt increased.
But go on calling for higher taxes you simpletons.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Let me give you some equivalent good advice, Garage don’t worry about making bank deposits, worry about making money, let your courier (me) worry about the bank deposits…..
Gee, thanks Jeremy. :rolleyes:
George W. Bush, along with a Republican-dominated Congress, passed THREE tax cuts, bringing the tax burden on the top 1% to the lowest level in history.
Also: tens of millions of people were dropped of the federal income tax rolls.
Also: every tax payer received a tax cut
Also: Federal revenues increased 44% between 2003-2006.
Garage: But given the chance to get that last commission check in the old versus the new year your accountant, unless a fool, would countenance you to take it in the new year. Do not be one of those people who gives moral authority to their lawyers or accountants, please. Because that would give you the chance to ride your high horse and still get the benefit by claiming that you just followed your accountant's orders. You can make that fly with lefties but not with conservatives who know how the world works.
I'm used to the "They do too pay taxes! They pay payroll taxes!" which is a crap argument (since that (supposedly) funds their Social Security benefits), but I don't think I've ever seen anybody have the balls to argue, "They pay taxes, it's just that their deductions are bigger!"
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
bringing the tax burden on the top 1% to the lowest level in history.
No possibly a low RATE, but the top 20% pay 70&% of the taxes, and IIRC, the top 1% pay the plurality of that…so the BURDEN is heavy, even if the rate is low….thank you for contributing, though.
but I don't think I've ever seen anybody have the balls to argue, "They pay taxes, it's just that their deductions are bigger!"
Well, she is a special kind of stupid that jeremy...
Garage: But given the chance to get that last commission check in the old versus the new year your accountant, unless a fool, would countenance you to take it in the new year
I see what you mean, and yes I'm sure that's what my acct would do. If my own business I could, but in my particular case I cannot bank commission checks.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
I see what you mean, and yes I'm sure that's what my acct would do. If my own business I could, but in my particular case I cannot bank commission checks.
But you CAN juggle payment schedules and equipment purchases…and inventory levels….all of which can impact your liability and year’s income…and NONE of which have anything to do with bid’ness, but a LOT to do with gub’mint taxation….
Again, a SIMPLER tax system means less silliness like that and fewer accountants…which is why accountants, tax-lawyers, estate planners, and the makers of Turbo Tax tremble at Income Tax reform….
Joe - The top pay the bulk...because they make the bulk.
What is it about that that you can't understand?
Are you implying you think the wealthy are over-taxed?
Tax rates are at their lowest ebb in 60 years.
Original Mike - "The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property."
What is it about this that you don't understand?
LarsPorsena said...
"Will they end the Neocon wars? Tell SS recipents no COLAs for the next 5 years? Tell seniors that heroic end of life medical care expenses will have to come out of their pocket or their families but the Feds will no longer pay carte blanche? Will Republicans line up and demand an end to Bush's unfunded Big Pharma drug cost subsidy? The Ethanol subsidy? Farmers subsidies? The mansion mortgage bailout?"
Why is that incumbent of the R's. Why can't dear leader do it? You know it's necessary.
========================
Generally, the problem is twofold:
The Democrats have a coherent message but one that most people who will determine the dollars value or lend money recognize is undoable. "Raise taxes, look at spending at every level" They cannot raise taxes enough to offset their spending, and the cuts they make are negligable.
The Republicans have determined that tax cuts for the rich are inviolate and tell the public that the deficits can be addressed without any new revenue - "we need to cut Fed Spending"...
Then when asked...begin their squirmfest. "All cuts are being studied." "Why can't Obama say what cuts he is willing to make 1st!! He should say 1st!"
When Republicans are pinned down, they reluctantly say...no, they want no cuts in Medicare that would force Death Panels to say no to the 700,000 lung cancer drug that might buy another month of sacred life...No cuts in defense spending for the Heroes. No ending of wars and nation-building for Noble Freedome-Lovers! No to ending oil subsidies. No tariff tax on China stuff (Smoot Hawley! Smoot Hawley!!) They want the ethanol subsidies????? (As the current Republican Presidential hopefuls did with the exception of Ron Paul. "No taxes never!! Ever!!" Screamer Michelle Bachmann, a former IRS lawyer to collect tax money - hedges - saying that "the ethanol subsidy needs more time to be studied. Pawlenty says he is against it, but only with a 10 year to 5 year "phase-out, depending on what Congress would recommend to him as President.." with 75% of the phaseout in the last 2 years.)
I mean, come on!
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Are you implying you think the wealthy are over-taxed?
Yes they are 70% of the tax, but only about 55% of Pre-Tax INCOME….Geeeez, this isn’t difficult and has been covered everywhere on the ‘Net Jeremy.
Tax rates are at their lowest ebb in 60 years.
Obviously UNTRUE, as Regan had lower rates…and that’s just from reading this thread. Again, thank you for contributing.
Now who's the grownup?
McConnell grows a pair
What is it about this that you don't understand?
Nothing.
Nobody said they don't pay gasoline taxes, clown.
The fact is, 48% don't pay income taxes. And no matter how many times you type they pay Social Security or property taxes, the fact doesn't change.
What don't you understand?
@Jeremy
Poll: Fox, O'Reilly Most Trusted News Sources
[O]f the top 10 most trusted new sources, O'Reilly is king, at 9 percent. CNN's Anderson Cooper followed at 6 percent, Fox's Mike Huckabee at 4 percent, Fox's Sean Hannity at 4 percent, Wolf Blitzer was sixth at 3 percent, followed by MSNBC's Chris Matthews at 3 percent, NBC newsman Tom Brokaw at 3 percent, CBS anchor Katie Couric at 3 percent and ABC's Diane Sawyer at 3 percent.
"The fact is, 48% don't pay income taxes. And no matter how many times you type they pay Social Security or property taxes, the fact doesn't change."
Thanks, Jay. I find talking to him distasteful.
Jeremy wrote:
"Joe - We should close the loopholes that allow the most profitable corporations pay literally no income taxes, and at the same time raise taxes on the top 2% by 2-3 points."
Do you know the top 2.41% had aggregate earnings of $1.079 Trillion in 2009 [average was $298,000] and your idea to tax another 2-3% would only increase tax revenue by $22-$32 Billion a year. That is less than 1% of current annual spending.
Though I regularly try to ignore your comments Jeremy I will declare here, as someone in that evil top 5%
No I will not pay more taxes until my government can demonstrate that it can reduce expenditures, not present a nice table about projected savings, not create a task force or committee to study the problem and come up with solutions, not savings based on the ever elusive "improved efficiency" or "cutting of waste, fraud and abuse"
No I mean REAL cuts. And yes that will mean the BIG pieces of the pie: Medicare (of which I'm 12 short years from receiving), SS (ditto) and defense.
And yes cut the subsidies to corporations, but not just the "really profitable ones" but the ones that suck too.
When that gets done and done again and stuck to
then I'll discuss taxes.
BLS indicates that roughly 155 million Americans are working or seeking work out of roughly 300 million population. So roughly 140 million are working with the overly optimistic estimate of 9+% unemployment. So roughly 70 million pay 96% of all INCOME taxes. (Emphasis to obviate the picking of nits by the liberal wits.) Obama claims roughly 240 million Americans want higher taxes. Sounds like there is hardly any overlap between those are paying income tax now and those who want higher taxes - about 1 out of 14 actual workers or 1 out of 7 who work and pay income taxes. Rasmussen claims only 34% support higher taxes - that's a slight discrepancy from Obama's claim - 140 million fewer tax hike supporters.
Crypto-Jew
"what a maroon you are…what do they do with the funds they MANAGE you moron!? That’s right, they INVEST THEM! In businesses, that CREATE JOBS!"
Then by your logic, the rest of us that pay a larger chunk of each dollar we earn vs. the hedge fund managers at 16% tax level - should all have our taxes cut to 16% so we can INVEST THOSE DOLLARS! CREATE JOBS!
Even if that would add another 2 trillion to annual deficits.
Treat every America like your Heroic, beloved jobs-creating fatcats.
Lets go back to the glorious days of the early Bushies when they said that cutting taxes would grow the economy far faster than Clinton and double the jobs creation rate. And while deficits were going to be huge, they really didn't matter under Reaganomics because economic and jobs growth would pay for all those cuts eventually. (Alas, the economic and jobs growth was in China...and contrary to Freed Trader Globalists assertions, the Chinese were not putting the money back into products from US or empty Mexican Maquiladora factories.
They did buy our debt T-bills and whatever natural resources they could buy control of. We got the T-Bills to pay for jobless Americans and hosting tens of millions of jobless Mexicans.
But yeah, lets treat every American like Crypto-Jews heroic "jobs machine" Hedge Fund managers.
Cut my families taxes to 16%. Repeat the mantra that deficits don't matter.
Allow me to invest in more China, Asia mutual funds so the jobs created there are BOUND to one day create jobs here (outside Walmart and container ship handlers)
And in the interim, all we need to do is eliminate those Wombat fertility studies at 2 million and all the "waste fraud and abuse" - until growth pays for my taxes going from 28% down to the 16% Hedge Fund rate!
Phil 3:14 said: "No I will not pay more taxes until my government can demonstrate that it can reduce expenditures, ... And yes cut the subsidies to corporations, but not just the "really profitable ones" but the ones that suck too.... then I'll discuss taxes."
AMEN.
Jeremy wrote:
"Here's how a family making $50,000 pays almost no "income" taxes:
The family is entitled to a standard deduction of $11,400 and four personal exemptions of $3,650 apiece, leaving a taxable income of $24,000. The federal income tax on $24,000 is $2,769.
With two children younger than 17, the family qualified for two $1,000 child tax credits. Its Making Work Pay credit was $800 because the parents were married filing jointly.
The $2,800 in credits exceeds the $2,769 in taxes, so the family makes a $31 profit from the federal income tax."
Thanks - that is the most succinct example I have ever seen of what is wrong with out tax system!
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Then by your logic, the rest of us that pay a larger chunk of each dollar we earn vs. the hedge fund managers at 16% tax level - should all have our taxes cut to 16% so we can INVEST THOSE DOLLARS! CREATE JOBS!
NO ONE CAN BE THIS STUPID…who cares what the managers EARN, what they DO is what is important…they manage investment funds, and those funds drive jobs! You keep acting like the “evil rich” make their contribution via buying Mercedes-Benz’s and hiring gardeners…they make their contribution via their investments in the markets! Take that money and you dry up investment, business and jobs!
All of which hurt the Middle Class you bleed for so….
Fund Managers get those Bucks because it’s hard technical work…not because they are Jooos or something…they didn’t “win life’s lottery” you schmuck!
We can discuss taxes AFTER the politicians eat their peas! Until then, we don't trust you any further than we can spit.
Corporations do not pay taxes. No business does. They collect taxes from their customers and pass them on to the government. If they did not do that, they would go out of business. Taxation is part of the cost of goods sold and must be included in the retail price. The customers pay it.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Corporations do not pay taxes. No business does. They collect taxes from their customers and pass them on to the government. If they did not do that, they would go out of business. Taxation is part of the cost of goods sold and must be included in the retail price. The customers pay it.
Heretic! Deviationist! Off With Your Head!
WV: “Brones” I spin-off of where Temperance Brennan has gone to work in Guatemala, leaving Booth, Hodges and Sweets to solve the cases.
Are you implying you think the wealthy are over-taxed?
Crypto-Jew - "Yes they are 70% of the tax, but only about 55% of Pre-Tax INCOME….Geeeez, this isn’t difficult and has been covered everywhere on the ‘Net Jeremy."
Essentially, you are arguing against progressivity, which every nation has, even the most capitalistic - in recognition that a portion of each persons income involves non-discretionary spending - while the remainder - the discretionary dollars one can spend or invest as they please, is greatly affected by income levels.
A low-skilled worker making 28K may have only 5% of their money left as discretionary.
A upper middle class person taxed at 28% may have 30% of each dollar "left".
A Hedge Fund billionaire or Ye Olde owner of a bank taxed at 16% may have 70% of each dollar left as discretionary.
Progressive rates are to blunt that. A small group with 55% of the nations wealth concentrated in them through ownership-investment may pay 70% of the taxes...but are still in a position where they not only make vastly more dollars, but they "own" a bigger chunk of each dollar to spend or invest as they please..
The number of people turning down a promotion or a business opportunity that would make them lots of money because they are upset they would be "unfairly punished" by moving into a higher tax bracket?
Zero.
Number of people looking at a Goldman Sachs banker specializing in bundled derivative mortgage defaults making 4 million a year and - concluding the poor banker is "punished" by having to pay more out on each dollar in taxes than some NYC subway cop?
Zero.
People sympathetic to the travails of a Banana Republic oligarchy grabbing 80% of a nation's wealth but paying 90% of the dictatorships Federale taxes?
Zero.
=============
BTW, Crypto-Jew, you contradicted yourself when you said that while a billionaire hedge fund operator may employ few, they CREATE JOBS through investments...but unlike middle class people ..you then said that the skilled and wise management of the hedge fund not investment..is what CREATES JOBS!!
So you have this oil market speculator and 20 rich investors in his hedge fund, also taxed at 16%, that run up oil prices...They employ few people at the hedge fund, they do not cause new oil production jobs because none of the speculative money goes to oil producers.
They put a quarter into a speculative ploy on copper prices, one quarter on more oil market manipulation schemes, 1/4th into Chinese factories making Green products the US government subsidizes buying, and 1/4th into US debt T-bills. (after each pays taxes, gets the latest BMW and blows 40K on some nice fun stuff)
Where are those John Galt Heroes of the new American economy creating jobs??
C4:
"..Why can't Obama say what cuts he is willing to make 1st!! He should say 1st.."
Why can't BO say where the cuts are going to be? You've avoided the question again.
Jeremy...Why not admit that the money Obama wants is from the taxes paid by the between the 250K income and the 1000K income bracketts.
That is what drives the economy and that is what Obama wants to confiscate a chunk of .
People in the 1000k+ bracket seldom spend more when they keep more. Ask Warren Buffett. They say more taxes sounds fine.
But the 250K to 1000K bracket guys WILL spend more if the taxes don't confiscate it first. Ask me.
A simple analysis of numbers of taxpayers in each bracket shows that a 100% tax on the 1000K+ guys will not bring in 10% of what Obama wants to redistribute away.
That is why your and Obama's argument about us 250K to 1000K guys is being concealed with Rich People smoke.
I have to go wash my Private Jet now. Have a nice day.
Why does no one ever mention the fact that $250k does not equal $250 does not equal $250k. Nobody ever talks about cost of living, real estate values, local taxes, etc. Earning $250k in one local can be wildly different than making is somewhere else, yet since the campaign trial, President Obama and crew have been bandying this around like a one-size/fits all.
If there was a qualification of $250k and I missed it, disregard, but I certainly don't recall one.
I find the economic comparisons between now and Reagan, now and 100 years ago, etc. distasteful. The economy does not exist in a vacuum.
The whole point of the current situation is NOT what others did or did not do. It's that we have never before been in this specific situation -- spending so much while we are so very much in debt. (...while the Middle East is on fire, while Europe is rioting, while [fill in the blank]...)
Patterns may repeat, but history does not repeat itself. There are always new variables in play.
Currently, the repeating patterns are "promises" of "future cuts" that never actually happen, a president who cares more about campaigning than governing, citizens who are fed up with being penalized for being productive, and [fill in the blank]. Add to that the ever increasing debt (and no realistic plan from the executive branch to make a long-term change in the debt pattern -- from increasing to decreasing). Add to that the president's failures at transparency. Add to that the Democrats and Republicans both reacting to the situation by leaning farther to the left/right.
To sum up: I don't care what Reagan did. Or Bush. Or anyone else. I care about what the variables add up to RIGHT NOW. The only reason to compare current situations to previous points in history (that are riddled with so many unique variables that attempts to draw logical comparisons are fruitless) is to politicize one side of the situation.
---
I think it's very simple to see that raising the debt limit is not an inherent right that one side of the politicks is trying to prevent. The "right" is to NOT raise the debt ceiling. The "right" is the status quo, in which the debt ceiling #s remain as is.
Those who want to raise the debt ceiling want to change the status quo. Those who want to raise the debt ceiling must present an argument that persuades the voters -- Congress-- that raising the debt ceiling is good/just/necessary.
The burden of proof is on those who want to raise the debt ceiling -- and not the other way around.
My president telling me that the other side is being childish for not wanting to do what he has not been able to prove is necessary... that just makes me sick.
What kind of bizarro world are we living in, where the burden of proof is put on those who want to continue with the status quo while those who want to change the status quo call their opponents childish?
---
Dear Mr. Obama,
We have been operating for 800+ days without a budget. The House gave a symbolic vote months ago against raising the debt ceiling. It's not like you didn't know this was coming, Mr. President. You let it ride until the last minute, and now you have the AUDACITY to HOPE a compromise can be reached, meanwhile calling House Republicans childish? Forget eating peas. Maybe it's time to consider a metaphor about the government's nicotine addiction.
"...If we're going to keep the size of the federal government within its historical share of GDP, then we've got to cut spending dramatically. If we don't do that, then we've got to impose European levels of taxation....'
I think they call that a feature, not a bug.
"...What is it about this that you don't understand?...'
Because those have nothing to do with Federal income tax moron.
I swear I have underwear smarter than you.
Traditional_Guy asked: "Jeremy...Why not admit that the money Obama wants is from the taxes paid by the between the 250K income and the 1000K income bracketts."
No, no, no. Millionaires and billionaires. Just keep repeating it. Millionaires and billionaires, millionaires and billionaires....
Original Mike: I too insist on combining the three words, millionaires and billionaires and would encourage others to never use the word millionaires in isolation. This idiot president wants to play with language let us mock him with his own abject stupidity. Millionairesandbillionaires. The family of four making 250K is exactly in the same boat as Warren Buffet, Obama, because they are all millionjairesandbillionaires.
Joanna - Your poll is from Boston's Suffolk University?
Who the fuck are they?
Joe - Why are you so concerned with what the wealthy pay in taxes?
We both know you don't make anywhere near what what would be necessary to enjoy such breaks.
Why not spend more time reading and less time whining and bitching about everything the President says or does?
After all, YOU voted for little Georgie twice...and look what that got us.
Corn Cob - "Because those have nothing to do with Federal income tax moron."
I never said they had anything to do with "income taxes," asshole.
I merely pointed out that the people you and other dumbass teabaggers here constantly yelp about "not paying taxes"...do indeed pay "taxes."
The reason many do not is directly related to tax laws, credits, and other means of lessening one's tax burden.
What is it about the wealthy that you and others here feel needs defending?
Are you saying they wealthy pay too much in tax and should pay less?
The top 1% pay an average of about 16%.
Something I'm sure you didn't even know.
"...Why not spend more time reading and less time whining and bitching about everything the President says or does?.."
Why don't you? You didn't even know the difference between income tax and capital gains tax.
Duh
"...I merely pointed out that the people you and other dumbass teabaggers here constantly yelp about "not paying taxes"...do indeed pay "taxes."
Federal income tax moron. That is what was under discussion.
"...Are you saying they wealthy pay too much in tax and should pay less?.."
Nope. Merely stating the proven fact that the more you tax capital gains the less revenue you get from the increase because the taxed individual defers more of the income.
As I said earlier, even the current moron in the white house admitted that.
You really are dumb.
Jeremy said...
Joanna - Your poll is from Boston's Suffolk University? Who the fuck are they?
Suffolk University poll link.
Now, where the fuck do you get your stats and info from?
'Now, where the fuck do you get your stats and info from?'
DailyKos School of Business Management, Womyn's Studies, and Beautician Engineering.
We don't know what's in that 4 trillion. But I don't know anyone disputing that Obama proposed a 4 trillion dollar package.
Ahh, I see.
Either Garage Mahal is so stupid that he will believe a large number casually tossed around by Barack Obama, who (by Garage's belated admission) has never specified the actual spending cuts to be taken.
Or Garage Mahal knows full well that Obama's "offer" was pure, shimmering vaporware—and is repeating someone else's lie for political gain.
Corn Cob - "You didn't even know the difference between income tax and capital gains tax."
Actually, if you'd taken the time to read my previous comments, I mentioned exactly that distinction, on more than one occasion today.
They primarily pay taxes on capital gains, which average about 17%.
But overall, the wealthiest of the wealthy pay at about a 16% clip.
So...once again...why are YOU and other teabbagers here who make nowhere near the kind of money as the wealthiest...whine about how they shouldn't pay more?
You support the wealthy over the middle and lower class American?
Seems strange, except of course, for the fact that most of you are as dumb as a bag of rocks and spend 99% of your time here sucking on each other.
Joanna - "Now, where the fuck do you get your stats and info from?"
As for polling, I would prefer using one of the more reputable and recognized organizations that have been polling for decades, and have track records relating to their methodology and accuracy.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
*WOW* So, now Jeremy has simply given up arguing the facts. First, that the rich don’t pay enough taxes, or that they don’t pay a PROPORTIONATE share. S/h’s simply reduced to saying, “Hey you don’t know any of these ‘rich’ people; so what do you care what happens to them?” I’ll take that as a victory…OK, Jeremy; I care, because I care about Good Public Policy. I care because I’d like to BE one of them one day. I care because they make the economy go around and when we suck the life’s blood from THEM, we’re sucking the Life’s Blood from me, too. Now mayhap you’re a wage slave or one of the salariate, in government or academe, and you think what happens to Buffet or Meadehouse doesn’t affect you, but it DOES…if the economy is static, but population grows, your share of the pie gets smaller…and unless you’re name is Immelt or Boehner, rest assured, your share will get smaller, ergo it behooves you to see an expanding pie, not a static or shrinking one. Get over your hatred of people further up the socio-economic ladder, IF they’re doing well how does it hurt YOU? And if they are hurt, how are YOU helped?
Lastly, C4 is STILL an economic illiterate….if you can’t grasp that whilst Harry/Henrietta Hedge Fund Manager contributes little, PERSONALLY, to the economy but much via his/her fund, I can’t help you. And your example is typically illiterate…”Speculators”/hedge fund operators, don’t drive up the price of oil. Supply and Demand do that. Drill Here, Drill Now and oil falls, focus on Green Technology and “necessarily energy costs skyrocket” and they will CLIMB. Traders only take the basics, the US uses “X” oil, but only produces .75X of its oil…and will produce even LESS, ergo the demand for oil, will, exceed supply and the price will rise. They are just betting other people’s money on how much and how fast….want to frustrate them, drill here and drill now…stop complaining about them. You can bankrupt them and their clients with RATIONAL Energy Policy. Instead, you and Obama merely want to blackguard them, and demonize them, without doing anything about the underlying market realities.
"...But overall, the wealthiest of the wealthy pay at about a 16% clip..."
No they don't. They pay at 36% .
Jeremy said...
Joe - Why are you so concerned with what the wealthy pay in taxes?
Er, why are you?
But overall, the wealthiest of the wealthy pay at about a 16% clip.
That would be a lie. And you can produce no fact or data supporting this dipshit assertion.
Man, you can always tell when the Won's internal polling sucks...they send out the shit flinging comment monkeys.
Since 1939, Congress has raised the debt limit 89 times. In fact, in two-thirds of these instances, there was a Republican president, and no one ever used the vote as leverage...
Trying to win an election by gambling with the US Economy...you must be proud.
Number of Presidents who voted against a debt ceiling increase when given the chance?
One.
Barack Obama.
I merely pointed out that the people you and other dumbass teabaggers here constantly yelp about "not paying taxes"...do indeed pay "taxes."
...ironically, the rich pay WAY more in those taxes than the poor do, as a general rule.
But dolts like you claim they do not.
What percentage IS "their fair share"?
George W. Bush, along with a Republican-dominated Congress, passed THREE tax cuts, bringing the tax burden on the top 1% to the lowest level in history.
Presumably because all that save income would trickle jobs all around the country.
But the first net job created by the Bush tax cuts did not come until the second quarter of 2005.
His net jobs created in eight years?
One million jobs.
Under Bush, unemployment PEAKED at 6.3%. Obama would KILL for one that low.
...and Obama, when THIS year is over, will have already increased the debt more than Bush did in 8.
Congrats.
Wow, C-fudd the "progressive" sounds a lot like them Bolshevik Jooooooos. Supports my contention he's really a self-loathing Jew.
Post a Comment