Tax Cut for the Wealthiest Will Cost America $700B

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

It will cost America 700 Billion dollars in revenue to extend the taxes on the "wealthiest".

I understand the argument that the wealthiest contribute to the national economy-- but not every "wealthy" person contribute to the economy in the way that employs people.

Further, it's in their best interest to invest and grow their companies-- they will do this regardless.

Why shouldn't the wealthy do what they can to help their country?

Whatever happened to, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"?




Oh that's right, that only applies to the poor in order to motivate them to send their sons and daughters to fight and die in unnecessary wars while the sons and daughters of the wealthiest can party it up at college.


I guess the wealthiest Americans seem to always get the tough breaks in life.

Let's not tax them at all so! We owe rich people so much!
(I would compare this to Affirmative Action-- but tax cuts for the wealthiest is special treatment for people who are not disadvantaged, neither is there a risk of their marginilization in our capitalist society.)

That's goofy, JD, the rich are ready paying, not only most of the taxes, they pay at higher rates. The argument about the "poor" fighting the wars is nonsense, the highest percentage of the military is middle and upper middle class. These are tire old arguments that the Demo continue to use and the media doesn't debunk, because they are the fifth column.

BTW: Fortysomething percent of Americans pay NO federal income taxes!!! Who do you think is already paying.

[Bowas]

Many espouse a rally cry of all Americans should pay their "Fair share." What does that mean?

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Many espouse a rally cry of all Americans should pay their "Fair share." What does that mean?

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by coadie

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx

Thank you Coadie but I am kind of looking for an explaination that further details "fair share".
Everyone seems to be talking about tax this group, tax that group so surely there is a fair way of taxing and I keep hearing "fair share" so what does that mean?

[ILG]

I wish they would just say a percentage for everyone and call it good and cut some social programs.

[coadie]

Read the lie from Obama last week.

The biggest whopper from Friday is this gem "So these policies of cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans, of stripping away regulations that protect consumers, running up a record surplus to a record deficit — those policies finally culminated in the worst financial crisis we've had since the Great Depression." No mention of Fannie or Freddie and the housing bubble that was government created. No mention of the skyrocketing energy prices that lit the fuse to the economic meltdown. No mention of the fact that AFTER the taxes were cut, government revenues increased substantially.

He has an uneducated audience that doesn't know it when he fibs.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...he_l_word.html

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by ILG

I wish they would just say a percentage for everyone and call it good and cut some social programs.

This approach would make too much sense.

In fact, if they really wanted to make things fair, they would eliminate income taxes all together. Just tax the things that people purchase.

Again, sensibility escapes most when it comes to taxes.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

...
In fact, if they really wanted to make things fair, they would eliminate income taxes all together. Just tax the things that people purchase.
...
.

Some would say that is unfair because those who purchase cars or homes or boats would pay more than those who just purchase food and clothing and pay rent.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

The argument about the "poor" fighting the wars is nonsense, (1) the highest percentage of the military is middle and upper middle class.

BTW: (2) Fortysomething percent of Americans pay NO federal income taxes!!! Who do you think is already paying.

(1) You are mistaken, but maybe you have stats to back your claim up.

(2) For all the good that rich people do, you would think they would employ people and pay them at a wage where they can actually afford to pay taxes. However, I don't believe that 40% of Americans are paying no federal income taxes. Do you have stats?

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Sam

Some would say that is unfair because those who purchase cars or homes or boats would pay more than those who just purchase food and clothing and pay rent.

Well at least it would be thier choice to buy this or buy that.

Most people have limited abilities when it comes to choosing thier income bracket-- so many "X" factors involved.