Shifting the tax burden to the wealthy class does NOT harm the economy

[bedowin62]

how many left-wing gazillionaires have voluntarily raised the amount they pay to the government by just cutting Uncle Sam a check???????

We have a voluntary tax system?

Back to ignore for you Bubs

you never had me on ignore mental-case

lol

Still do dummy, have to hit show ignore losertarin list to see your posts Bubs

if you do that then you arent ignoring anybody idiot


GEEESH!

 

[Dad2three]

Clinton took a 2.6% deficit to a 1.3%

The balanced budget of the Clinton years is the chief reason I support John Kasich for President.

He is the only candidate who actually played a major role in balancing the federal budget during that period. And we need someone who knows how to do it more than ever.

You agree Ronnie HUGELY increased the deficits compared to GDP then while Clinton cut it?

 

[bedowin62]

Clinton took a 2.6% deficit to a 1.3%

The balanced budget of the Clinton years is the chief reason I support John Kasich for President.

He is the only candidate who actually played a major role in balancing the federal budget during that period. And we need someone who knows how to do it more than ever.

He vote for the 1993 Dem budget bill that created the surpluses? Or did he support the $700 billion tax cut the GOP passed AFTER Clinton's first surplus?

UR RIGHT IDIOT; that one year budget "created surpluses"; not the six budgets that came after it, not the ones forged by the Republican House majority

 

[Dad2three]

how many left-wing gazillionaires have voluntarily raised the amount they pay to the government by just cutting Uncle Sam a check???????

We have a voluntary tax system?

Back to ignore for you Bubs

you never had me on ignore mental-case

lol

Still do dummy, have to hit show ignore losertarin list to see your posts Bubs

if you do that then you arent ignoring anybody idiot


GEEESH!

Sure Bubs, as soon as the page turns

 

[bedowin62]

Clinton took a 2.6% deficit to a 1.3%

The balanced budget of the Clinton years is the chief reason I support John Kasich for President.

He is the only candidate who actually played a major role in balancing the federal budget during that period. And we need someone who knows how to do it more than ever.

You agree Ronnie HUGELY increased the deficits compared to GDP then while Clinton cut it?

ronnie did nothing without the consent and approval of his Democrat-majority Congress


keep trying

 

[bedowin62]

how many left-wing gazillionaires have voluntarily raised the amount they pay to the government by just cutting Uncle Sam a check???????

We have a voluntary tax system?

Back to ignore for you Bubs

you never had me on ignore mental-case

lol

Still do dummy, have to hit show ignore losertarin list to see your posts Bubs

if you do that then you arent ignoring anybody idiot


GEEESH!

Sure Bubs, as soon as the page turns

LMAO!!

another reply to somebody you supposedly cant see!!!!!!!

 

[bedowin62]

gee i'm glad everybody here can see you have me on ignore; you're replying to posts you shouldnt be able to see!!


lol just make a fool of yourself in front of EVERYBODY!!

 

[Dad2three]

Clinton took a 2.6% deficit to a 1.3%

The balanced budget of the Clinton years is the chief reason I support John Kasich for President.

He is the only candidate who actually played a major role in balancing the federal budget during that period. And we need someone who knows how to do it more than ever.

He vote for the 1993 Dem budget bill that created the surpluses? Or did he support the $700 billion tax cut the GOP passed AFTER Clinton's first surplus?

UR RIGHT IDIOT; that one year budget "created surpluses"; not the six budgets that came after it, not the ones forged by the Republican House majority

You mean by setting US on a GOOD FISCAL COURSE by getting revenues needed with the 1993 budget bill AND cutting spending, which not a single GOPer voted for?

Nah, we saw how "fiscally responsible" the GOPers were when AFTER Clinton's first surplus, they voted a $700+ billion tax cut BJ Bill had to veto to get 3 more. THEN The Dubya/GOP "fiscal responsible" party happened!

 

[bedowin62]

LMAO!!

you just cant make this stuff up!!

 

[Oldstyle]

When the American economy was rockin' and rollin' back in the 60's and 70's we had a top tax rate on the wealthy of 91% and a 10% usery law that prevented charging more than 10% interest.

The peasants were also allowed to deduct 100% of the interest they paid on everything on their income taxes both state and federal.

Until Ronald Reagan created the largest tax increase on the middle class in history when he took the interest deduction away, except for your home mortgage -- and he WANTED to take that away too.

Having a high tax rate on the uber wealthy serves two purposes.

1) It raises more money to pay down the country's debt -- thanks to Bush's Follies.

2) It motivates the wealthy to use their remaining money to start more businesses and expand the one's they own in order to get more money.

If a man has 100 million dollars rs a year coming in from his factory, and the government lets him keep 92 million, he has little motivation to expand his plant or start another business.

If he had 100 million dollars a year coming in from his factory, and the government lets him keep 10 million, he has LOTS of motivation to expand his operations and start more.

He still owns his yacht and mansions and now needs more money to KEEP them just like his employees need to make money to pay their rent / house payment.

He's still a rich man, nobody took his factory away from him, but with a high tax rate he pays more to society for the better life he is receiving from society. And that helps society.

Proof of my statement is that when we HAD high tax rates on the wealthy ... they DID expand their businesses and start more. Times were booming.

But, since Reagan and the massive give aways to the wealthy under the pretense it would create more jobs ( which has been proven untrue ) we have cut the taxes on the wealthy and they just hide their money overseas and sit on their wealth.

The conservatives claim that giving welfare to the poor encourages them not to work.

Well, tax cuts for the rich are the same thing as welfare to the poor --- only it's welfare for the RICH.


===============

It's kind of weird how good it was then and now how bad it is today since the rich have been getting away with this crap.

We spent far more on infrastructure, science, r&d and education when we had the revenue to do so.

Or that rich person can simply put his wealth into tax free shelters and wait out your attempts to tax him into oblivion! I wish just a few of you progressives had taken something in college that dealt with reality.

 

[Dad2three]

When the American economy was rockin' and rollin' back in the 60's and 70's we had a top tax rate on the wealthy of 91% and a 10% usery law that prevented charging more than 10% interest.

The peasants were also allowed to deduct 100% of the interest they paid on everything on their income taxes both state and federal.

Until Ronald Reagan created the largest tax increase on the middle class in history when he took the interest deduction away, except for your home mortgage -- and he WANTED to take that away too.

Having a high tax rate on the uber wealthy serves two purposes.

1) It raises more money to pay down the country's debt -- thanks to Bush's Follies.

2) It motivates the wealthy to use their remaining money to start more businesses and expand the one's they own in order to get more money.

If a man has 100 million dollars rs a year coming in from his factory, and the government lets him keep 92 million, he has little motivation to expand his plant or start another business.

If he had 100 million dollars a year coming in from his factory, and the government lets him keep 10 million, he has LOTS of motivation to expand his operations and start more.

He still owns his yacht and mansions and now needs more money to KEEP them just like his employees need to make money to pay their rent / house payment.

He's still a rich man, nobody took his factory away from him, but with a high tax rate he pays more to society for the better life he is receiving from society. And that helps society.

Proof of my statement is that when we HAD high tax rates on the wealthy ... they DID expand their businesses and start more. Times were booming.

But, since Reagan and the massive give aways to the wealthy under the pretense it would create more jobs ( which has been proven untrue ) we have cut the taxes on the wealthy and they just hide their money overseas and sit on their wealth.

The conservatives claim that giving welfare to the poor encourages them not to work.

Well, tax cuts for the rich are the same thing as welfare to the poor --- only it's welfare for the RICH.


===============

It's kind of weird how good it was then and now how bad it is today since the rich have been getting away with this crap.

We spent far more on infrastructure, science, r&d and education when we had the revenue to do so.

Or that rich person can simply put his wealth into tax free shelters and wait out your attempts to tax him into oblivion! I wish just a few of you progressives had taken something in college that dealt with reality.

AT 2%? There is THAT much tax free bonds? lol

Talk about NOT living in reality!

 

[Sun Devil 92]

If 10% pay 70% of Federal taxes, what's the point of the the premise?

For 10% to pay 95% ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I think Mr. Buffett is directing the debate away from the obscene corporate bailouts that have been going on since the financial crisis of 2008 and on to a contrived issue of class warfare that will do little to address America’s severe financial problems. If we are really serious about fixing the deficit, then let’s stop the bailouts. Mr. Buffett is supposed to be an expert investor. So, why do so many of the companies he owns or invests in need to be bailed out! What kind of strategy is this? It looks to me like Buffett made some bad bets, and when they blew up, he became an advisor to the administration. Then, he watched as the bailouts not only saved his bacon, but made him and his shareholders even more insanely rich than they already were.

Yes, the bailouts have entirely warped our capitalist system. Broken, corrupt business models are being shored up by the government, keeping more efficient and transparent business models from thriving and succeeding. The corruption and fraud of the bad models is being condoned and sanctioned by the State.

It's sickening.

Amidst all the screams of depression and job salvation....and the cries of academics pining for more government money.....

The bailouts were an awful idea.

The government should have stayed clear.

You can keep your claims of "saved" for someone who thinks you might have a chance of making a case.

 

[Meathead]

Daddy feels he's being unfairly treated because he has to pay state sales tax I guess..

 

[Dad2three]

If 10% pay 70% of Federal taxes, what's the point of the the premise?

For 10% to pay 95% ?

LIE

 

[Dad2three]

I think Mr. Buffett is directing the debate away from the obscene corporate bailouts that have been going on since the financial crisis of 2008 and on to a contrived issue of class warfare that will do little to address America’s severe financial problems. If we are really serious about fixing the deficit, then let’s stop the bailouts. Mr. Buffett is supposed to be an expert investor. So, why do so many of the companies he owns or invests in need to be bailed out! What kind of strategy is this? It looks to me like Buffett made some bad bets, and when they blew up, he became an advisor to the administration. Then, he watched as the bailouts not only saved his bacon, but made him and his shareholders even more insanely rich than they already were.

Yes, the bailouts have entirely warped our capitalist system. Broken, corrupt business models are being shored up by the government, keeping more efficient and transparent business models from thriving and succeeding. The corruption and fraud of the bad models is being condoned and sanctioned by the State.

It's sickening.

Amidst all the screams of depression and job salvation....and the cries of academics pining for more government money.....

The bailouts were an awful idea.

The government should have stayed clear.

You can keep your claims of "saved" for someone who thinks you might have a chance of making a case.

CONservatives CLAMOR for the great GOP depression 2.0. According to ALL economist with ANY credibility

• The Troubled Asset Relief Program of 2008 rescued our financial system from almost certain meltdown, saving the U.S. financial system at the brink of disaster
• The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 helped us avoid the feared second Great Depression and kickstarted renewed economic growth
• The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 strengthened the fledgling economic recovery by cutting the payroll tax and continuing extended unemployment insurance benefits

This column will detail the top 10 reasons why these three key government interventions in the economy were successful.


10 Reasons Why Public Policies Rescued the U.S. Economy

 

[bedowin62]

I think Mr. Buffett is directing the debate away from the obscene corporate bailouts that have been going on since the financial crisis of 2008 and on to a contrived issue of class warfare that will do little to address America’s severe financial problems. If we are really serious about fixing the deficit, then let’s stop the bailouts. Mr. Buffett is supposed to be an expert investor. So, why do so many of the companies he owns or invests in need to be bailed out! What kind of strategy is this? It looks to me like Buffett made some bad bets, and when they blew up, he became an advisor to the administration. Then, he watched as the bailouts not only saved his bacon, but made him and his shareholders even more insanely rich than they already were.

Yes, the bailouts have entirely warped our capitalist system. Broken, corrupt business models are being shored up by the government, keeping more efficient and transparent business models from thriving and succeeding. The corruption and fraud of the bad models is being condoned and sanctioned by the State.

It's sickening.

Amidst all the screams of depression and job salvation....and the cries of academics pining for more government money.....

The bailouts were an awful idea.

The government should have stayed clear.

You can keep your claims of "saved" for someone who thinks you might have a chance of making a case.

CONservatives CLAMOR for the great GOP depression 2.0. According to ALL economist with ANY credibility

• The Troubled Asset Relief Program of 2008 rescued our financial system from almost certain meltdown, saving the U.S. financial system at the brink of disaster
• The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 helped us avoid the feared second Great Depression and kickstarted renewed economic growth
• The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 strengthened the fledgling economic recovery by cutting the payroll tax and continuing extended unemployment insurance benefits

This column will detail the top 10 reasons why these three key government interventions in the economy were successful.


10 Reasons Why Public Policies Rescued the U.S. Economy

Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was a Bush policy idiot

you have ZERO EVIDENCE the obama Stimulus saved us from ANYTHING

but hey dont mind me bro; I'M INVISIBLE RIGHT????


LOLOLOLOLOL!!

 

[Dad2three]

I think Mr. Buffett is directing the debate away from the obscene corporate bailouts that have been going on since the financial crisis of 2008 and on to a contrived issue of class warfare that will do little to address America’s severe financial problems. If we are really serious about fixing the deficit, then let’s stop the bailouts. Mr. Buffett is supposed to be an expert investor. So, why do so many of the companies he owns or invests in need to be bailed out! What kind of strategy is this? It looks to me like Buffett made some bad bets, and when they blew up, he became an advisor to the administration. Then, he watched as the bailouts not only saved his bacon, but made him and his shareholders even more insanely rich than they already were.

Yes, the bailouts have entirely warped our capitalist system. Broken, corrupt business models are being shored up by the government, keeping more efficient and transparent business models from thriving and succeeding. The corruption and fraud of the bad models is being condoned and sanctioned by the State.

It's sickening.

Amidst all the screams of depression and job salvation....and the cries of academics pining for more government money.....

The bailouts were an awful idea.

The government should have stayed clear.

You can keep your claims of "saved" for someone who thinks you might have a chance of making a case.

Federal Reserve vice chairman Alan Blinder

Blinder: TARP prevented "financial cataclysm."


AEI's Malkin: Policy response "averted" global depression. From a January outlook report by the American Enterprise Institute's John H. Malkin:

We can expect 2010 to be a volatile year. This likelihood is underscored by looking back at 2008 and 2009. Two thousand eight was a highly volatile year leading up to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September, which was followed by the risk of a total systemic meltdown. That sharp and obvious risk spike prompted massive policy responses that were simply the largest that central banks, with rate cuts and liquidity provision, and governments, with tax cuts and spending increases, could manage. The result -- beginning in March 2009 -- was a linear rise in the prices of risky assets, the result of massive relief once the slip into a global depression had been averted and the acute phase of the crisis in the financial sector had passed.

Nowakowski: Policies have "averted depression." In a September 13 column, David Nowakowski, director of credit strategy at Roubini Global Economics, wrote that the Federal Reserve's fiscal policies, "along with the fiscal stimulus," have "averted depression, reversed a short bout of deflation, and helped unemployment from reaching 1930's levels."

Romer: Policies made difference between recovery and "second Great Depression."

 

[Dad2three]

Daddy feels he's being unfairly treated because he has to pay state sales tax I guess..

half of us get a free ride huh? LOL

 

[bedowin62]

ONCE AGAIN DULLARD; you use the example of "total taxes" in a discussion of federal taxes. this is particularly laughable since the state and local taxes you are throwing in there are often the result of DEMOCRAT POLICIES

you want to cry on behalf of the poor and working-class about a "TOTAL TAX" BURDEN YOU PLACED ON THEM.