Obama Sais --------TAX The RICH !! (345)
CJSingsBluesOmaha, Nebraska USA2 Threads 197 PostsI don't "do" politics. I keep that rather private, but I would like to tell you that Warren Buffett is quite a kind, gentle man on a personal level. Just saying.
------ This thread is Archived ------
CJSingsBlues: I don't "do" politics. I keep that rather private, but I would like to tell you that Warren Buffett is quite a kind, gentle man on a personal level. Just saying.
No one is disputing that!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sparky55: Well that's just perfect. So what is an increase of income tax to the wealthy going to do other than incite more jealousy against the wealthy?
If they want to correct the way corporations are taxed to include the owners, they need to be rid of the loop holes enjoyed.
If they want to correct the way corporations are taxed to include the owners, they need to be rid of the loop holes enjoyed.
EXACTLY...taxing the rich is just the ordinary taking points for Obumbler for his re-election campaign. It's not going to create ANY JOBS! What is this clown actually doing to create Jobs! NOTHING!
Reading the comments by libs are funny. Obama has been prez for almost 3 years. And yet they still blame Bush for everything. EVERYTHING! OK I will play this game too. I blame everything on Jimmy Carter and Kennedy and James Polk. Makes about as much sense.
Obama can't even comprehend that it's a spending problem in conjunction with a revenue problem.
He is a liberal who has nothing to offer but the Democratic talking points we hear every day from the left. He advocates big government, the redistribution of wealth from the haves to the have-nots and the creation of the "nanny state."
Democrats continue to blame George W. Bush when they and everybody else knows President Obama now owns this economy. Obama's stimulus spending and health care program are fueling our debt and he does not have a clue how to create a job — unless it's government jobs.
------ This thread is Archived ------
CJSingsBlues: I don't "do" politics. I keep that rather private, but I would like to tell you that Warren Buffett is quite a kind, gentle man on a personal level. Just saying.
As evidenced by fighting the IRS in the past for taxes owed.
------ This thread is Archived ------
CJSingsBlues: I don't "do" politics. I keep that rather private, but I would like to tell you that Warren Buffett is quite a kind, gentle man on a personal level. Just saying.
Hi CJ....When you're that rich, you can afford to be kind and gentle or not so kind and gentle anytime it pleases you...
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: http://news.yahoo.com/tax-rich-obama-says-class-warfare-says-gop-213322999.html
Why shouldn't the Rich pay taxes at the same rate as Middle Class ?
Why continue to protect the Rich ?
true,where are the jobs?time to pony up&stop the b/s.govt.said small biz is the backbone of usa/speaker then backtracked,to protect the rich,bad lapdog.Why shouldn't the Rich pay taxes at the same rate as Middle Class ?
Why continue to protect the Rich ?
------ This thread is Archived ------
hotburninluv: EXACTLY...taxing the rich is just the ordinary taking points for Obumbler for his re-election campaign. It's not going to create ANY JOBS! What is this clown actually doing to create Jobs! NOTHING!
Reading the comments by libs are funny. Obama has been prez for almost 3 years. And yet they still blame Bush for everything. EVERYTHING! OK I will play this game too. I blame everything on Jimmy Carter and Kennedy and James Polk. Makes about as much sense.
Obama can't even comprehend that it's a spending problem in conjunction with a revenue problem.
He is a liberal who has nothing to offer but the Democratic talking points we hear every day from the left. He advocates big government, the redistribution of wealth from the haves to the have-nots and the creation of the "nanny state."
Democrats continue to blame George W. Bush when they and everybody else knows President Obama now owns this economy. Obama's stimulus spending and health care program are fueling our debt and he does not have a clue how to create a job — unless it's government jobs.
they were in debt,long b4 prez got elected.Reading the comments by libs are funny. Obama has been prez for almost 3 years. And yet they still blame Bush for everything. EVERYTHING! OK I will play this game too. I blame everything on Jimmy Carter and Kennedy and James Polk. Makes about as much sense.
Obama can't even comprehend that it's a spending problem in conjunction with a revenue problem.
He is a liberal who has nothing to offer but the Democratic talking points we hear every day from the left. He advocates big government, the redistribution of wealth from the haves to the have-nots and the creation of the "nanny state."
Democrats continue to blame George W. Bush when they and everybody else knows President Obama now owns this economy. Obama's stimulus spending and health care program are fueling our debt and he does not have a clue how to create a job — unless it's government jobs.
------ This thread is Archived ------
reb56: they were in debt,long b4 prez got elected.
Sure we were! Noboby's denying that little Bush left Obama in economic debt. But in just under the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5 trillion, to now what is totally about 4.5 trillion. Which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan. He's become the Spending Champion in all of U.S. History!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Albertaghost: I agree but would like to add that taxing the rich while a good idea in theory is not going to help or hinder the problem the US has at this time as they head for the abyss.
It's a sideshow to divert attention to the lack of spending cuts that is the real problem.
Can I explain something in the hopes that some will understand exactly what many of us are saying? First, I am not "against" the wealthy. And, I don't believe you can improve a poor man's life by burdening a wealthy man. But here's what happens---The United States has long prided itself on the premise that, no matter who you are, if you are willing to work hard, you can get "ahead". That's totally cool, right? And fair, right? Of course. But here's what really happens: You work overtime, OR for two different jobs, as a lower-paid worker. As soon as you reach just a bit over what you might normally make at the hourly wage, because you are getting time and a half, you are thrust into a higher taxing percentage and thereby lose what you have strived to gain. It's a catch-22. So, what would be fair and more closely appropriate to our country's premise is to only be taxed an "across the board" amount. That is, say, 12 per cent for everybody. Everybody. The wealthy would not be burdened, as they so adamantly claim they are, and the poor man can dig his way out if he is willing to work harder. Why in the hell can't everyone see how totally fair that would be? The poor man who was not willing to work any harder would stay poor, and I have no disagreement in that many of the wealthy people got there by first being poor and working hard, but that was before all this taxing of the poor guy! There is nothing wrong with being rich, what is wrong is not paying the same percentage.It's a sideshow to divert attention to the lack of spending cuts that is the real problem.
------ This thread is Archived ------
rohaan: Can I explain something in the hopes that some will understand exactly what many of us are saying? First, I am not "against" the wealthy. And, I don't believe you can improve a poor man's life by burdening a wealthy man. But here's what happens---The United States has long prided itself on the premise that, no matter who you are, if you are willing to work hard, you can get "ahead". That's totally cool, right? And fair, right? Of course. But here's what really happens: You work overtime, OR for two different jobs, as a lower-paid worker. As soon as you reach just a bit over what you might normally make at the hourly wage, because you are getting time and a half, you are thrust into a higher taxing percentage and thereby lose what you have strived to gain. It's a catch-22. So, what would be fair and more closely appropriate to our country's premise is to only be taxed an "across the board" amount. That is, say, 12 per cent for everybody. Everybody. The wealthy would not be burdened, as they so adamantly claim they are, and the poor man can dig his way out if he is willing to work harder. Why in the hell can't everyone see how totally fair that would be? The poor man who was not willing to work any harder would stay poor, and I have no disagreement in that many of the wealthy people got there by first being poor and working hard, but that was before all this taxing of the poor guy! There is nothing wrong with being rich, what is wrong is not paying the same percentage.
That's a "better made" argument. However, could we agree that maybe, just maybe...the Feds are wasting money like drunken sailors?
------ This thread is Archived ------
rohaan: Can I explain something in the hopes that some will understand exactly what many of us are saying? First, I am not "against" the wealthy. And, I don't believe you can improve a poor man's life by burdening a wealthy man. But here's what happens---The United States has long prided itself on the premise that, no matter who you are, if you are willing to work hard, you can get "ahead". That's totally cool, right? And fair, right? Of course. But here's what really happens: You work overtime, OR for two different jobs, as a lower-paid worker. As soon as you reach just a bit over what you might normally make at the hourly wage, because you are getting time and a half, you are thrust into a higher taxing percentage and thereby lose what you have strived to gain. It's a catch-22. So, what would be fair and more closely appropriate to our country's premise is to only be taxed an "across the board" amount. That is, say, 12 per cent for everybody. Everybody. The wealthy would not be burdened, as they so adamantly claim they are, and the poor man can dig his way out if he is willing to work harder. Why in the hell can't everyone see how totally fair that would be? The poor man who was not willing to work any harder would stay poor, and I have no disagreement in that many of the wealthy people got there by first being poor and working hard, but that was before all this taxing of the poor guy! There is nothing wrong with being rich, what is wrong is not paying the same percentage.
You make a good point about a flat tax on income. I would be more than happy with that though I think the 12% (example) rate is quite low. I'm also fine with a VAT as this would pretty much be a consumption tax. Both would, if nothing else, simplify the US Tax code.
------ This thread is Archived ------
hotburninluv: Sure we were! Noboby's denying that little Bush left Obama in economic debt. But in just under the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5 trillion, to now what is totally about 4.5 trillion. Which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan. He's become the Spending Champion in all of U.S. History!
------ This thread is Archived ------
"Why should`nt the rich pay the same tax rate as the middle class."
At best...this is a disingenuous argument put forth by the president to get re-elected....{they are talking about raising the "income tax" rate here folks}....I`m here to tell you that raising the "income tax" rate will not even touch most rich people.Stop and think where rich people get the bulk of their income......I`m not going to waste my time trying to educate folks who can`t see the forest for the trees,but if you honestly believe that if the President can convince the Congress and Senate to pass legislation to change the "income tax" code thereby catching all these fat cats to fix the problem then I have a bridge that I would be glad to sell you. Where do you think a guy like Warren Buffet gets the bulk of his income?
At best...this is a disingenuous argument put forth by the president to get re-elected....{they are talking about raising the "income tax" rate here folks}....I`m here to tell you that raising the "income tax" rate will not even touch most rich people.Stop and think where rich people get the bulk of their income......I`m not going to waste my time trying to educate folks who can`t see the forest for the trees,but if you honestly believe that if the President can convince the Congress and Senate to pass legislation to change the "income tax" code thereby catching all these fat cats to fix the problem then I have a bridge that I would be glad to sell you. Where do you think a guy like Warren Buffet gets the bulk of his income?
------ This thread is Archived ------
mustbnutz: "Why should`nt the rich pay the same tax rate as the middle class."At best...this is a disingenuous argument put forth by the president to get re-elected....{they are talking about raising the "income tax" rate here folks}....I`m here to tell you that raising the "income tax" rate will not even touch most rich people.Stop and think where rich people get the bulk of their income......I`m not going to waste my time trying to educate folks who can`t see the forest for the trees,but if you honestly believe that if the President can convince the Congress and Senate to pass legislation to change the "income tax" code thereby catching all these fat cats to fix the problem then I have a bridge that I would be glad to sell you. Where do you think a guy like Warren Buffet gets the bulk of his income?
Don't think that anyone believes having the rich pay equal taxes will fix our economy. But for many - it might create less resentment in knowing the government protects those who can afford to influence the government for special treatment.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: Don't think that anyone believes having the rich pay equal taxes will fix our economy. But for many - it might create less resentment in knowing the government protects those who can afford to influence the government for special treatment.
fair is fair.------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: GOOD, then the next move after taxing the rich will be a 50% reduction in what you collect from Americans paying your pension.
You'll get out only what you put in ......
You'll get out only what you put in ......
I'd restart that successful business if I were you. It would have been better than collecting unemployment for 3 years,wouldn't it?
Hopefully it didn't have anything to do w/solar panels.
------ This thread is Archived ------
mustbnutz: The guys involved with solar panels are all going to take the 5th Friday at the hearing.They all got their chunk of the 535 million and sent it to Switzerland.
Well I'd get it out of California. That's one big cesspool . Everyone's leaving...except for an idiot or two...(and San Franscisco).
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: You couldn't afford property in California .......
do you own any?------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: You couldn't afford property in California .......
Here's a CNN news flash. You couldn't give me California property.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: GOOD, then the next move after taxing the rich will be a 50% reduction in what you collect from Americans paying your pension.
You'll get out only what you put in ......
You'll get out only what you put in ......
You might be well served to worry about your democrat cronies do:
By Jason Grotto, Tribune reporter
9:00 p.m. CDT, September 21, 2011
Most city workers spend decades in public service to build up modest pensions. But for former labor leader Dennis Gannon, the keys to securing a public pension were one day on the city payroll and some help from the Daley administration.
And his city pension is more than modest. It's the highest of any retired union leader: $158,000. That's roughly five times greater than what the typical retired city worker receives.
In fact, his pension is so high that it exceeds federal limits and required the city pension fund to file special paperwork with the Internal Revenue Service to give it to him.
Gannon's inflated pension is a prime example of how government officials and labor leaders have manipulated city pension funds at the expense of union workers and taxpayers. Like other labor leaders, he was able to take a long leave from a city job to work for a union and then receive a city pension based on a high union salary.
But in a new twist, a Tribune/WGN-TV investigation has found that Gannon is eligible for the lucrative pension deal only because City Hall rehired the former Streets and Sanitation Department worker for a single day in 1994, then granted him an indefinite leave of absence.
Another Obummer type cronie...
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
wanting beyond need
Common Issues with the BMW X1
Happy Birthday MysteriousGirl80
The Best of the GOP
men's perspective towards women
Feel Good Music
Sleepy Don!
other can see but not you
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
your personality
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).