Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its a reuters article .
Published on Tuesday, January 4, 2011 by Reuters Most Americans Say Tax Rich to Balance Budget: Poll
81% Say Tax Rich or Cut Military; 3% Say Cut Social Security
No it isn't, Common Dreams references but fails to link Reuters.
They also contradict all polling I can find.
Budget/Taxes
Hey, they're leftists - of course they're lying.
The most popular: placing a surtax on federal income taxes for those who make more than $1 million per year (81 percent said that was acceptable), eliminating spending on earmarks (78 percent), eliminating funding for weapons systems the Defense Department says arent necessary (76 percent) and eliminating tax credits for the oil and gas industries (74 percent).
Well more of a cheer leader.
Playing alot of "catching up". Still it's probably not going to make up for all the loses that occurred during the Bush administration. The reality is that Bush and his Conservative base happily ran the American economy into a big pile of shit.
Digging out is going to stink.
yeah.....but nobody cares about Bush anymore except the internet k00ks..........
Which is to bad really.
Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it.
There is one reason that the top tax bracket is never raised anymore.
They are the ones who pay the meal tickets of our government representatives.
The right loves it that way.
Proof?Yes, let's squash economic growth even more so that a larger portion of the population will become government dependents.
Great idea.
Nope!
He's got the entire field of economics behind him, but you mean what does he have beyond that? You got him there...
Proof?
Nope!
He's got the entire field of economics behind him, but you mean what does he have beyond that? You got him there...
Who does? It's not "Few" economists who say raising taxes on upper echelons will hurt economic growth; It's in fact virtually none. It's just a lie that gets repeated and repeated and repeated until it becomes the new truth.
There is one reason that the top tax bracket is never raised anymore.
They are the ones who pay the meal tickets of our government representatives.
The right loves it that way.
Yeah, It's not like The Democrats in Congress are receiving any meal tickets from Big Oil or Corporations?Just more hypocritical drivel really. ~BH
They are, for christ sakes can we stop pretending that one side does not *blank*. Everytime a point is raised someone somewhere compares to something someone else did. I dont like Dems or Repubs that line their pockets from corporate donors. The only difference is is that some Dems (I BELIEVE, THIS IS MY FUCKING OPINION) speak up about corporate influencing our elections or generally being unfair. I cant remember when any Repub (I BELIEVE, AGAIN THIS IS MY OPINION) has said anything about corporations except how great they are to America.
fAiL.........Common Dreams is a fake website visited only by far lefties
Every poll you dont agree with is accused of bias. Nothing is true unless you believe it so.
No, all of our problems won't be solved by taxing the rich, they are just a starting point. Just one dot along the way, but an important dot. When they have to start paying their own way they will stop spending government money.
Start paying their own way? Have you ever looked at the Governments own numbers on who pays what? The Rich already pay 70% of the Tax Load, how much do you expect them to pay?
This is exactly why we do not have a direct Democracy. If we did 51% of the people would vote to take the other 49% money and have it handed out to them.
I wouldn't even call that The Rich. The split point last year was $113K.
Somebody making $113K has much more in common with somebody making $90K than he does with Bill Gates.
What the Obama Administration and their cohorts are doing is demonizing middle and upper middle class people and pitting them against the lower middle class.
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
The split point for the top 5% was $159L (again Not Rich), and for the top 1% it was $380K (upper middle class but Not Rich).
There just aren't that many wealthy people. I read an article awhile ago calculated the total net worth of all the billionaires in the U.S. If we seized all their wealth, it wouldn't even cover the budget deficit for this year alone.
He's got the entire field of economics behind him, but you mean what does he have beyond that? You got him there...
Who does? It's not "Few" economists who say raising taxes on upper echelons will hurt economic growth; It's in fact virtually none. It's just a lie that gets repeated and repeated and repeated until it becomes the new truth.
huh?
Why must you make up a statistic like that to support your side of the debate?
Are you that insecure with your position?
Hey genius... you could take ALL of their money and it wouldn't come close to paying off our debts.
Please stop reading failed Marxist claptrap.
We'll always have debt. Clinton and the Republicans cut spending AND raised taxes, and at least that resulted in a balanced budget. And it happened in record time, following massive debt left by Bush41 who inherited it from Reagan.
President George HW Bush was a pragmatist and began addressing the "debt problem" early on. It probably cost him the Presidency but it was the right thing to do for the country.
Who does? It's not "Few" economists who say raising taxes on upper echelons will hurt economic growth; It's in fact virtually none. It's just a lie that gets repeated and repeated and repeated until it becomes the new truth.
huh?
Why must you make up a statistic like that to support your side of the debate?
Are you that insecure with your position?
Uhhhh no... It's the truth... I'm sure Toro or WTW could confirm it, if you don't fancy me qualified.
The wealthy can chose not to pay the taxes by taking their money and moving oout of the country.
They pay the same amount as everyone else who makes as much as they do in this country.
IF you wish to stay in this country and use its infrastructure so that you can gain more money then you should pay for that use.
America is the worlds top market and coming with the ability to access this top market comes a fee.
Its called taxes.
Instead of just permitting the wealthy to just move here and get a free ride on all America has to offer them they need to pay for their use of everything the people have invested in and built.
When federal funds are doled out to the states so they can maintain roads and bridges I think the people who use them the most should pony up a good chunk of the cost to build and maintain such things.
The wealthy benifit the most from our infrastructure and each dollar they make in the US reflects that use.
It also reflects their need to pitch in and pony up their fair share of the cost to build, fix and maintain our countries LIFE BLOOD of industry, Our infrastructure.
Besides, the fucking rich bastards, I hate them. You are right, comrade. Let's see if I have this straight.
1) People need the money, so they should receives what they need
2) Rich pricks can afford it, so they should pay what I want because I have decided they have the means.
So you are saying from each according to their means to each according to their needs.
Where have I heard this before???
huh?
Why must you make up a statistic like that to support your side of the debate?
Are you that insecure with your position?
Uhhhh no... It's the truth... I'm sure Toro or WTW could confirm it, if you don't fancy me qualified.
I do not consider you qualified or unqualified...I do not know you.
But I also know that your "virtually none" statistic is inaccurate and so I questioned why you needed to assert a false statistic to support your argument.
Are you not confident in your position?
Of COIURSE they do. That's how class warfare works.That we should raise taxes on the wealthy in our time of need.
Uhhhh no... It's the truth... I'm sure Toro or WTW could confirm it, if you don't fancy me qualified.
I do not consider you qualified or unqualified...I do not know you.
But I also know that your "virtually none" statistic is inaccurate and so I questioned why you needed to assert a false statistic to support your argument.
Are you not confident in your position?
No it's actually quite accurate based on what I've been able to obtain on the subject. Only kool-aid drinking Randians support that claim.
Our history sure as shit doesn't.
ah, its a CONSPIRACYLiberal Democrats who hate businesses that hire people. To put it plain and simple.
It isn't the Democrats who have been sitting on $3 trillion fucking dollars while greedy businesses refused to start rehiring until Republicans got voted back in.
The cash buildup shows the deep caution many companies feel about investing in expansion while the economic recovery remains painfully slow and high unemployment and battered household finances continue to limit consumers' ability to spend.
yeah.....but nobody cares about Bush anymore except the internet k00ks..........
Which is to bad really.
Those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it.
Wanna bet how many of those internet kOOks will emerge from their slumber if Hillary Clinton decides to run again? It will be a renewal of the old CFDR (Clinton FAMILY Derangement Syndrome).
"Not only was the entire national deficit eliminated after raising taxes on the wealthy in 1993, but the economy grew so fast for the remainder of the decade that many conservative economists thought that the Fed should raise the prime interest rate in order to slow it down."
I do not consider you qualified or unqualified...I do not know you.
But I also know that your "virtually none" statistic is inaccurate and so I questioned why you needed to assert a false statistic to support your argument.
Are you not confident in your position?
No it's actually quite accurate based on what I've been able to obtain on the subject. Only kool-aid drinking Randians support that claim.
Our history sure as shit doesn't.
You are researching sites or data with a left spin to it.
Would you say the Bush tax cuts did NOT work as it pertians to employment?
Until the recession, did you see an increase in unemployment?
Now be careful...do not toss out those left leaning misleading stats of employment cause I will show you how they are misleading...
But did you not see unemployment pretty much remain stable after the tax cuts?
