John Boehner is dead wrong.

[AVG-JOE]

The revenue discussion can not be considered "closed" until the US Tax Code is considered fair and simple by a majority of taxpayers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner says the debate over increased revenue "is now closed."

Boehner: Revenue debate is 'closed' - Tallahassee News | ABC 27 WTXL: News: john boehner, president obama, revenue debate, fbi, taxes

 

[AVG-JOE]

59 views and no comments? Do all the Boehner fans agree?

That's unexpected.

 

[DiamondDave]

Fair?? Fair is subjective... No place for subjectivity in this... Until there is a system based on equality in treatment of every dollar earned by every person.. or every dollar spent by every person.. without exception, exemption, loophole, etc.. no tax discussion should ever be closed

 

[Mr. Shaman]

John Boehner is dead wrong.

For good reason......

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2RloNSp8tc]GOP House Leader A Lazy Drunk? - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[AVG-JOE]

Fair?? Fair is subjective... No place for subjectivity in this... Until there is a system based on equality in treatment of every dollar earned by every person.. or every dollar spent by every person.. without exception, exemption, loophole, etc.. no tax discussion should ever be closed

One way to provide fair and equal treatment of every dollar would be everyone paying the same rate and everyone getting exactly the same deduction.

Like 18% with one and only one deduction of $40,000 for citizens.

 

[Mr. H.]

If for example I'm willing to risk thousands or millions of dollars on a job-creating venture with no guarantee of a single dollar returned, you can bet your ass I expect special treatment under the Tax Code. Fuck the majority of taxpayers, they aren't the ones risking capital.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The revenue discussion can not be considered "closed" until the US Tax Code is considered fair and simple by a majority of taxpayers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner says the debate over increased revenue "is now closed."

Boehner: Revenue debate is 'closed' - Tallahassee News | ABC 27 WTXL: News: john boehner, president obama, revenue debate, fbi, taxes

Fuck that.

Obama wants a balanced approach, he got his tax hikes, it is time to cut the fucking spending.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Never mind that he's wrong! We should applaud him! Reinforce as many instances as we can where he doesn't burst into tears!

 

[Avatar4321]

boehner is wrong about alot of things. Obama even more things.

 

[Mr. H.]

You want a low tax rate on capital gains?

Go out and create some capital gains. And dividends.

You think that shit grows on trees?

It's earned through the assumption of risk. You don't have to be a millionaire. Set aside a few bucks for investment. It'll grown. Reinvest, put risk capital back to work. Compound your earnings and dividends. Quit the low-life bitching, get your head out of your ass, and get on the bandwagon.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Fair?? Fair is subjective... No place for subjectivity in this... Until there is a system based on equality in treatment of every dollar earned by every person.. or every dollar spent by every person.. without exception, exemption, loophole, etc.. no tax discussion should ever be closed

One way to provide fair and equal treatment of every dollar would be everyone paying the same rate and everyone getting exactly the same deduction.

Like 18% with one and only one deduction of $40,000 for citizens.

Im all for it....but liberals wouldnt control people with tax loopholes

 

[AVG-JOE]

The revenue discussion can not be considered "closed" until the US Tax Code is considered fair and simple by a majority of taxpayers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker John Boehner says the debate over increased revenue "is now closed."

Boehner: Revenue debate is 'closed' - Tallahassee News | ABC 27 WTXL: News: john boehner, president obama, revenue debate, fbi, taxes

Fuck that.

Obama wants a balanced approach, he got his tax hikes, it is time to cut the fucking spending.

Spending is a very valid discussion and certainly needs to be addressed. That's not the point of this thread. Neither is Obama.

The thesis here is that the revenue discussion is far from closed. The tax code remains way to complicated and full of favoritism. It's bullshit.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Fair?? Fair is subjective... No place for subjectivity in this... Until there is a system based on equality in treatment of every dollar earned by every person.. or every dollar spent by every person.. without exception, exemption, loophole, etc.. no tax discussion should ever be closed

One way to provide fair and equal treatment of every dollar would be everyone paying the same rate and everyone getting exactly the same deduction.

Like 18% with one and only one deduction of $40,000 for citizens.

Im all for it....but liberals wouldnt control people with tax loopholes

What does that mean?

 

[Mr. H.]

The revenue discussion can not be considered "closed" until the US Tax Code is considered fair and simple by a majority of taxpayers.

Fuck that.

Obama wants a balanced approach, he got his tax hikes, it is time to cut the fucking spending.

Spending is a very valid discussion and certainly needs to be addressed. That's not the point of this thread. Neither is Obama.

The thesis here is that the revenue discussion is far from closed. The tax code remains way to complicated and full of favoritism. It's bullshit.

Favoritism? Why pay taxes on income that is immediately spent on generating more income? Why pay taxes on income that goes towards wages, equipment, supplies, or services all in the name of generating... more income?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The revenue discussion can not be considered "closed" until the US Tax Code is considered fair and simple by a majority of taxpayers.

Fuck that.

Obama wants a balanced approach, he got his tax hikes, it is time to cut the fucking spending.

Spending is a very valid discussion and certainly needs to be addressed. That's not the point of this thread. Neither is Obama.

The thesis here is that the revenue discussion is far from closed. The tax code remains way to complicated and full of favoritism. It's bullshit.

Let me clarify.

FUCK THAT!

We do not have a revenue problem. The US took in $2.5 trillion last year, which is more money than Bush spent in 2008 when the Democrats were complaining about two wars being run on a credit card.

We NEED to cut spending.

 

[Votto]

Fuck that.

Obama wants a balanced approach, he got his tax hikes, it is time to cut the fucking spending.

Spending is a very valid discussion and certainly needs to be addressed. That's not the point of this thread. Neither is Obama.

The thesis here is that the revenue discussion is far from closed. The tax code remains way to complicated and full of favoritism. It's bullshit.

Let me clarify.

FUCK THAT!

We do not have a revenue problem. The US took in $2.5 trillion last year, which is more money than Bush spent in 2008 when the Democrats were complaining about two wars being run on a credit card.

We NEED to cut spending.

A significant reduction in spending is a mere fantasy. So is a change to the tax code.

Both parties have seen to it that things are the way they are, even though they may demagogue to the contrary.

I'm pretty much done with both parties in this respect. Nothing will ever change except the deterioration of the standard of living in the US as both parties attempt to blame each other for it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Let me clarify.

FUCK THAT!

We do not have a revenue problem. The US took in $2.5 trillion last year, which is more money than Bush spent in 2008 when the Democrats were complaining about two wars being run on a credit card.

We NEED to cut spending.

Seriously, I don't see why it would be difficult to take the government back to 2007 level spending. I don't think it's enough. But I highly doubt the world would end if we did that. Heck, I don't see how the world would end if we took the government back down to 2001 spending.

Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress seemed to be able to run the country alright during the 90s. The left says that Bill Clinton was a great President and things were great during the 90s. So why not shift the spending levels back to Clinton era spending. It wasn't that long ago.

And since Obama is claiming credit for ending the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we don't have spending on those to worry about indefinitely.

Honestly, I don't give a damn if Obama takes all the credit for fixing our finances if they are actually fixed or at least improved. It's amazing what you can get done when you don't care who gets the credit. Let's just fix the damn problem.

And please excuse my language, it's just a topic im passionate about.

 

[Avatar4321]

A significant reduction in spending is a mere fantasy. So is a change to the tax code.

Both parties have seen to it that things are the way they are, even though they may demagogue to the contrary.

I'm pretty much done with both parties in this respect. Nothing will ever change except the deterioration of the standard of living in the US as both parties attempt to blame each other for it.

It would be a difficult effort. But i dont think it would be impossible. it would just take a lot of work. it would take alot of education on the matter.

If I were running for President in 2016. I would make fixing our financial problems the biggest priority. I would encourage the American people to follow suit. We need to get our financial house in order. The longer it's out of order, the less we can be confident in the stability of the economy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

John Boehner is dead wrong.

He usually is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Let me clarify.

FUCK THAT!

We do not have a revenue problem. The US took in $2.5 trillion last year, which is more money than Bush spent in 2008 when the Democrats were complaining about two wars being run on a credit card.

We NEED to cut spending.

Seriously, I don't see why it would be difficult to take the government back to 2007 level spending. I don't think it's enough. But I highly doubt the world would end if we did that. Heck, I don't see how the world would end if we took the government back down to 2001 spending.

Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress seemed to be able to run the country alright during the 90s. The left says that Bill Clinton was a great President and things were great during the 90s. So why not shift the spending levels back to Clinton era spending. It wasn't that long ago.

And since Obama is claiming credit for ending the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we don't have spending on those to worry about indefinitely.

Honestly, I don't give a damn if Obama takes all the credit for fixing our finances if they are actually fixed or at least improved. It's amazing what you can get done when you don't care who gets the credit. Let's just fix the damn problem.

And please excuse my language, it's just a topic im passionate about.

I would give Obama the credit if he took spending down to Clinton levels. I might even get behind a drive to repeal the 22nd Amendment.