Hey, 99 Percenters, You Call This 'Fair'?

[Article 15]

Obama has already said he won't renew the Bush tax cuts when they expire in Dec of 2012.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Chris]

Right?

Actually it went down below 45% because Clinton raised taxes on the rich.

I guess some people can't read a graph.

Yet it started at 42% when he took office....

And check out the slope of the line up until the dip....

That's because the Reagan tax cuts were still in place.

Clinton then raised taxes on the rich and it went down until Bush cut them again.

Income inequity hurts our economy and is morally wrong.

 

[Chris]

Obama has already said he won't renew the Bush tax cuts when they expire in Dec of 2012.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

 

[Article 15]

Actually it went down below 45% because Clinton raised taxes on the rich.

I guess some people can't read a graph.

Yet it started at 42% when he took office....

And check out the slope of the line up until the dip....

That's because the Reagan tax cuts were still in place.

Clinton then raised taxes on the rich and it went down until Bush cut them again.

Income inequity hurts our economy and is morally wrong.

Then explain why the line is relatively flat in the couple of years leading up to Clinton taking office but then the sudden spike.

 

[EriktheRed]

Obama has already said he won't renew the Bush tax cuts when they expire in Dec of 2012.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Form what I've seen so far, I'd bet against it along with Article. I wouldn't be surprised, if he gets re-elected, that the Prez finds a way to keep them going just to keep having a bargaining chip.

 

[Article 15]

Obama has already said he won't renew the Bush tax cuts when they expire in Dec of 2012.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Bet on whether or not the tax cuts are allowed to expire?

No thanks, Chris.

I said I'll believe it when I see it, not that it will never happen.

 

[Article 15]

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Form what I've seen so far, I'd bet against it along with Article. I wouldn't be surprised, if he gets re-elected, that the Prez finds a way to keep them going just to keep having a bargaining chip.

But yeah, gun to my head.....it ain't happening.

 

[Article 15]

Yet it started at 42% when he took office....

And check out the slope of the line up until the dip....

That's because the Reagan tax cuts were still in place.

Clinton then raised taxes on the rich and it went down until Bush cut them again.

Income inequity hurts our economy and is morally wrong.

Then explain why the line is relatively flat in the couple of years leading up to Clinton taking office but then the sudden spike.

Hmmmm....

What year was NAFTA passed?

When does that spike start?

 

[elvis]

Actually it went down below 45% because Clinton raised taxes on the rich.

I guess some people can't read a graph.

Yet it started at 42% when he took office....

And check out the slope of the line up until the dip....

That's because the Reagan tax cuts were still in place.

Clinton then raised taxes on the rich and it went down until Bush cut them again.

Income inequity hurts our economy and is morally wrong.

Hey Monica, Clinton raised taxes in 1993, you stupid fuck. It doesn't take that long for people taxes to go up.

 

[elvis]

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Form what I've seen so far, I'd bet against it along with Article. I wouldn't be surprised, if he gets re-elected, that the Prez finds a way to keep them going just to keep having a bargaining chip.

Ex-President Clinton to Newsmax: Raising Taxes Won't Work

 

[rightwinger]

Obama has already said he won't renew the Bush tax cuts when they expire in Dec of 2012.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Obama will cave...he always does

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will mean a big tax increase for the middle class right before the election. Republicans won't budge on tax increases on the rich and Obama will give in

 

[NYcarbineer]

So,

for all of you who are not rich, but want to cut taxes for the rich, whose taxes do you want to raise to make up for the lost revenue?

Your own?

Right. The argument the class envy people on the left always rely on.
Here's the rub...Government does NOT have a revenue problem. Clearly it is a SPENDING problem.
Those on the left, the "tax more" crowd, never want to answer the question "why should inefficiency be rewarded".
How is it that those on the political left have designs on the privately "share of the nation's wealth" while saying nothing in opposition to the federal government's "share of the nation's wealth"....

What the fuck are you talking about? You want to cut taxes for the rich, you'll have less revenue. Somebody's taxes have to go up to recoup that revenue...

...we could of course make some massive cuts in defense to pay for that loss of revenue.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'll believe it when I see it.

Want to bet?

Obama will cave...he always does

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will mean a big tax increase for the middle class right before the election. Republicans won't budge on tax increases on the rich and Obama will give in

The election is November, the tax cuts don't expire till the end of the year. Obama will still be president when they expire even if he loses in November. Or he'll be re-elected to his second and final term. He can stick it to the GOP any number of ways.

 

[elvis]

Want to bet?

Obama will cave...he always does

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will mean a big tax increase for the middle class right before the election. Republicans won't budge on tax increases on the rich and Obama will give in

The election is November, the tax cuts don't expire till the end of the year. Obama will still be president when they expire even if he loses in November. Or he'll be re-elected to his second and final term. He can stick it to the GOP any number of ways.

You mean the way he did last January?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I indicated that I think it's unfair? Where did I do that? The productive are always going to have to support the less- or non-productive. That's a fact of life. Fairness has nothing to do with it.

I don't think you should talk about our retired military that way.

You don't think at all.

And retired military have contributed more to this nation than the OWS crowd. True story.

That's some horseshit there. Some of us have actually been in the military, you should remind yourself once in a while.

Once a guy hits E-6, unless he's in a combat arm or a few other areas,

he's pretty much one more fuck-off government employee living the high life and waiting for that fat pension.

 

[elvis]

Ah I knew I could count on NYcuminhisrear to piss on some veterans again. I knew it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama will cave...he always does

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will mean a big tax increase for the middle class right before the election. Republicans won't budge on tax increases on the rich and Obama will give in

The election is November, the tax cuts don't expire till the end of the year. Obama will still be president when they expire even if he loses in November. Or he'll be re-elected to his second and final term. He can stick it to the GOP any number of ways.

You mean the way he did last January?

Is he going to try to get a third term?

 

[rightwinger]

Want to bet?

Obama will cave...he always does

Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will mean a big tax increase for the middle class right before the election. Republicans won't budge on tax increases on the rich and Obama will give in

The election is November, the tax cuts don't expire till the end of the year. Obama will still be president when they expire even if he loses in November. Or he'll be re-elected to his second and final term. He can stick it to the GOP any number of ways.

It will be a major issue right before the election with Republicans screaming that Obama is raising middle class taxes. Obama will not be allowed to duck the decision till after the election

He has no backbone, and he will cave

 

[thereisnospoon]

Nobody is looking to take from others. But as a society we look for people to contribute what they can to help the society thrive. Nobody wants to rob from the rich and give to the poor. But why must we continue programs that help the wealthy accumulate and maintain more wealth? They are obviously doing well......why maintain incentives that let them do better?

I am not looking for cash hand outs to the poor. As a rule, they get wasted. I would rather see more incentives that allow them to get educated, care for their children, get affordable medical care, be able to buy their own homes......live the american dream

No... not when that rule of society that you make up because it makes you feel good forces others to live by your feelings of generosity...

I like being generous... supporting the causes that speak to me... but I would not force my way on someone else.. they have the freedom to not do a damn thing, even if I feel it is wrong to do so

You, as an adult, are responsible for your own fucking education.... you are responsible to provide for your children.... you are responsible for paying for the services you want or need, even if that is health care... you are responsible to put a roof over your own head, whether it be a shack, an apartment in the bad part of town, a condo in the suburbs, or a fucking McMansion... it is not up to society to make sure you have it on any level.... though I fully believe individuals should be as generous as their heart lets them be, voluntarily, of their own free will and not forced by society or government at the whims of those who want or need the handout, or the government officials elected because of promising those freebies

No question that we are responsible for where we are in life. As individuals we can work harder, play the system better and do better than others with a similar lot in life

Where we are failing is the middle class as a whole. the parameters of middle class has changed and they not only impact what you as an individual are able to achieve but what the middle class as a whole can accomplish

Education is moving to where it is no longer affordable. Skilled and unskilled labor positions are disappearing and no longer pay a living wage. healthcare used to be a small concern to working Americans, now they see a single major health issue can wipe out everything you have saved for.

A dream for all Americans was that our children will do better in life than we did. My father did better than his father, I did better than my father.......I do not see my children having the same path to success available that I had

You should have stopped with your first sentence.
The rest of your post is just whining.
I am in a form of customer service which places me in people's homes.
I see plenty of one income families. I see middle class people doing well.
I see plenty of people working from home in their own business.
Your assertion is typical doom and gloom from the left.
You people are programmed to wallow in misery.
Question...Which "unskilled and skilled labor positions are disappearing?
Ya wanna know why there are college grads working retail and other unskilled jobs? Because many of them have degrees that are not marketable.
I watched a report about an OWS ( where are those jackasses now?....Nowhere)who had a BA in business and a masters in medieval poetry or something of that nature..Greek philosophy or whatever..This protester was was wailing that her student loan debt should be forgiven. She also whined about not being able to find a white collar job like her other college grad friends. Yet the interviewer never asked what type degrees her friends had.
Bias in reporting there.
The point is many college bound people as well as grads "expect" a good high paying job to just be given to them because they have a degree.
Umm, higher education can be obtained at State in schools for in-state tuition. Or the Community College system where one not only can earn a two year degree but can also find continuing education and hands on skill education. Don't give me this nonsense about education being too expensive. That's horseshit. Private schools? Yes. Big name universities? For the most part, yes, they are expensive.
Higher education is expensive for one main reason.. WASTE...Most university upper level staff are paid well into the six figures and some over $1million per year...Why does OWS not protest THAT?
Another reason why higher learning is costly....Government subsidies grants and stuident loans....With these, university leaderships have no qualms about raising tuition. Many students do not pay the full amount anyway

 

[thereisnospoon]

As far as I am concerned, the top 1% should be paying 100% of the tax.

You own the government, then take some responsibility and PAY for it!

If you don't like it, then get your Bankster and Corporate Politicians out of our government, as well as put away your wallet and grab a bull horn like everyone else if you want to champion for various causes.


The current scheme and propaganda being espoused lately though, is how to twist it to make the other 99% pay for the privileged elite to keep the current ponzi scheme going.

Oh puhleeeeeeze.....
Yes tell people who have high earnings that beginning next year, your earnings for all of your work are ZERO.....That's just fucked up....
Hey genius, before you shoot off at the keyboard, why don't you do some fucking homework. First, check to see where corp political donations go to..Then check voting records for the wealthier areas of the country.