Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[dcraelin]

Kevin Phillips book "Arrogant Capital" is very instructive on the relationship of the rich to a countries debt............many make a living out of national debt........so in some ways want it high.....but also don't want to see a country default. ...So those types of influential people probably dont ever want to see our debt go down to far, certainly not to zero.

this explains in part why they try to manipulate the debate to ignore debt levels resulting from low taxes on the wealthy.

China props up our nation with a huge amount of debt purchase.....but they are having troubles themselves now..........so our level of sustainable debt is going down......

Which means it is more important than ever to tax the wealthy at higher levels in order not to become like Greece.

 

[Sallow]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income for taxes. We should all be taxed the same. Why punish wealth? Why punish success? Why tax one citizen any more than another? If one person is taxed 15% of their income, then everyone should be taxed at a 15% rate. We're all citizens. We all share highways, bridges, national defense, schools, libraries, fire departments, law enforcement, and other public services.

The wealthy benefit more from schools, roads, bridges, national defense, law enforcement and other public services than average Americans......they should pay more

Wait a minute: how are they benefiting more than anybody else? Even if they were, they are paying more than anybody else so it's already fair in that regard.

The wealthy don't need Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, SNAP's cards, Obama phones, school lunch programs just to name a few. If anybody benefits more, it's the poor because they put little to nothing into those programs and take all they can out.

Without roads, bridges, harbors, railroads a corporation has no way to get critical supplies in and finished product out. Corporate America would cease to exist

Common workers need roads to get to work and visit grandma occasionally

The entire infrastructure was built for one need and one need only....for national defense...

What the commoner got was a perk.

You do know that don't you?

This is partially true and mostly false.

 

[danielpalos]

Certainly unions and progressively led companies or more accurately collectives are paying their labor exactly what they are worth.

A workers paradise....

NO ??? Lol

no idea; it should depend on what their collective bargaining agreements stipulate.

it should not be any worse than labor with no collective bargaining ability.

 

[easyt65]

Liberals don't really want Americans to 'pay their fair share'. While BEING filthy rich themselves (Democratic Party and Liberal Elitist leaders), they either seek to pay as little as they can or simply don't pay their taxes, while advocating taking as much in taxes from everyone else that they can to fund their 'freebie' give-aways, donor payoffs, and *special projects designed to keep them in power.office.

46% of Americans do not pay taxes in this country, partly due to the Liberal program of 'Economic Slavery', a program designed to keep most Americans UN-successful and dependent on govt hand-outs in exchange for votes to keep the programs fully funded and the 'freebies' coming. The downside to this is that as the number of people dependent on the govt grows the fewer there are who you can tax...and to keep paying for all this as the number of recipients grows you have to keep taxing / taking more and more from the fewer and fewer there are left to pay for it all. That's why the old factual saying remains true: 'Socialism is GREAT until the Leaders/Self-Appointed Czars run out of OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY...and why every nation that has gone down this road and has embraced Socialism has FAILED...as in 'has COLLAPESD'!

'Fair Tax'. Get rid of the corrupt, biased IRS. Everyone has to pay a percentage. No more huge companies paying no taxes. No more allowing companies to take their businesses overseas to take advantage of slave labor then bringing the goods back into the US as if they were made here - put such a high import tariff on the goods coming back in that it will be cheaper to manufacture things back here in the states.

 

[danielpalos]

Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income for taxes. We should all be taxed the same. Why punish wealth? Why punish success? Why tax one citizen any more than another? If one person is taxed 15% of their income, then everyone should be taxed at a 15% rate. We're all citizens. We all share highways, bridges, national defense, schools, libraries, fire departments, law enforcement, and other public services.

The wealthy benefit more from schools, roads, bridges, national defense, law enforcement and other public services than average Americans......they should pay more

Wait a minute: how are they benefiting more than anybody else? Even if they were, they are paying more than anybody else so it's already fair in that regard.

The wealthy don't need Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, SNAP's cards, Obama phones, school lunch programs just to name a few. If anybody benefits more, it's the poor because they put little to nothing into those programs and take all they can out.

Without roads, bridges, harbors, railroads a corporation has no way to get critical supplies in and finished product out. Corporate America would cease to exist

Common workers need roads to get to work and visit grandma occasionally

Other than interstates the roads are a state expense. paid for by license fees and gas taxes

Not entirely true.

States get "block grants" from the Federal government which is suppose to be used to cover short falls in their own revenue. That use to be in addition to "ear marks" which have basically gone the way of "cooperation" with the current configuration of the government.

I believe the general government is obligated to pay the debts of the several United States; especially when advancing federal Standards for the Union.

 

[danielpalos]

Worked before

One thing we do know is that Supply Side Economics has been a failure

No it hasn't, it was successful what has been a failure is government, they waste, steal or lose our tax money.......and then that effects the economy....18 trillion in the hole means 18 trillion not being used to create an economy.

We had no debt until we adopted supply side economics. After all, Reganites claimed deficits don't matter and all tax cuts pay for themselves

Reagan's tax cuts brought in almost 2 times the amount in taxes than before, and the democrats in congress spent even more than that........they lied to Reagan about cutting spending and he learned his lesson about congressional democrats.

That's a bunch of Marlarkey.

Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending as a "stimulus" (Read huge gift to his buddies in the defense industry). Things got so bad he had to go, hat in hand, and beg Tip O'Neill to bail him out. Tip responded with one of the biggest tax increases in US history with the burden shifted mostly on the working poor. TIPs and unemployment income being taxed were two examples of brand spanking new taxes signed into law by President Reagan.

some on the left believe our wars on the abstractions of crime, drugs, poverty, and terror are merely forms of job creation by our more, nationalized and socialized, politicians.

 

[hadit]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

 

[hadit]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

MORE BS

JUST TAX THE TOP 1% DOUBLE (EFFECTIVE) OF TODAY AND THEY PAY 46% RATE AND WIPE OUT THE DEFICIT DUMMY

NOT LIKE THEY EVER PAID THAT MUCH, RIGHT?

NOT EVEN TALKING THE TOP 5% , JUST THE TOP 1% BUBS, LOL

Except you won't get that much. They are not stupid and will not sit still, allowing you to take that much more, Cletus.

 

[Campbell]

Worked before

One thing we do know is that Supply Side Economics has been a failure

No it hasn't, it was successful what has been a failure is government, they waste, steal or lose our tax money.......and then that effects the economy....18 trillion in the hole means 18 trillion not being used to create an economy.

We had no debt until we adopted supply side economics. After all, Reganites claimed deficits don't matter and all tax cuts pay for themselves

Reagan's tax cuts brought in almost 2 times the amount in taxes than before, and the democrats in congress spent even more than that........they lied to Reagan about cutting spending and he learned his lesson about congressional democrats.

That's a bunch of Marlarkey.

Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending as a "stimulus" (Read huge gift to his buddies in the defense industry). Things got so bad he had to go, hat in hand, and beg Tip O'Neill to bail him out. Tip responded with one of the biggest tax increases in US history with the burden shifted mostly on the working poor. TIPs and unemployment income being taxed were two examples of brand spanking new taxes signed into law by President Reagan.

Tax increases during the Reagan years? Horse Shit!! Bill Clinton raised tax rates on the wealthy in early 1993 while he still had a Democrat majority. Then....he went ahead and presided over one of the most successful eras in our history. He balanced the budget, even generated $400 billion of surpluses and left the economy in a shape which would have already completely paid off the national debt. When George W. Bush took over the first thing he did was cut taxes for the well off twice, 2001 and 2003 then proceeded to double the national debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion. "Tax and Spend" Democrats and "Spend and Debt" Republicans.

 

[dcraelin]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

 

[hadit]

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

And I'm pointing out that Washington WILL NOT apply any new revenue to debt reduction. The last Congress that came close was the one that held Bill Clinton's spending in check enough to allow revenue to catch up to spending. We currently have RECORD levels of revenue flooding into the treasury right now, yet still have deficits as far as the eye can see. Until Washington gains some spending restraint, any new revenue is as useful as handing a meth addict a hundred dollar bill to get his electricity turned back on.

 

[hadit]

Worked before

One thing we do know is that Supply Side Economics has been a failure

No it hasn't, it was successful what has been a failure is government, they waste, steal or lose our tax money.......and then that effects the economy....18 trillion in the hole means 18 trillion not being used to create an economy.

We had no debt until we adopted supply side economics. After all, Reganites claimed deficits don't matter and all tax cuts pay for themselves

Reagan's tax cuts brought in almost 2 times the amount in taxes than before, and the democrats in congress spent even more than that........they lied to Reagan about cutting spending and he learned his lesson about congressional democrats.

That's a bunch of Marlarkey.

Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending as a "stimulus" (Read huge gift to his buddies in the defense industry). Things got so bad he had to go, hat in hand, and beg Tip O'Neill to bail him out. Tip responded with one of the biggest tax increases in US history with the burden shifted mostly on the working poor. TIPs and unemployment income being taxed were two examples of brand spanking new taxes signed into law by President Reagan.

Tax increases during the Reagan years? Horse Shit!! Bill Clinton raised tax rates on the wealthy in early 1993 while he still had a Democrat majority. Then....he went ahead and presided over one of the most successful eras in our history. He balanced the budget, even generated $400 billion of surpluses and left the economy in a shape which would have already completely paid off the national debt. When George W. Bush took over the first thing he did was cut taxes for the well off twice, 2001 and 2003 then proceeded to double the national debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion. "Tax and Spend" Democrats and "Spend and Debt" Republicans.

$400 billion? I require a source for that number.

 

[Campbell]

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

Yeah...and guess where the debt came from. When Obama took office the annual interest on the existing debt was so high that now over two trillion extra dollars have been borrowed during his terms just to pay it. These figures are a matter of the debt bureau and can be verified:

.....................Total U S Debt....................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Is Obama a big spender?

 

[hadit]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

Yeah...and guess where the debt came from. These figures are a matter of the debt bureau and can be verified:

.....................Total U S Debt....................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

You left out quite a bit. You know, the part where the debt will have doubled again by the time the latest occupant of the White House leaves, after accumulating more debt than all the other presidents combined. Sorry, but you don't get to act like the last 7 years didn't happen.

 

[2aguy]

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

Yeah...and guess where the debt came from. These figures are a matter of the debt bureau and can be verified:

.....................Total U S Debt....................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Yeah….you forgot where Reagan made a debt to cut spending and the democrats lied and just kept spending….little detail…big difference.

 

[2aguy]

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

We're not paying the debt down at all. In fact, we are running half trillion dollar deficits every year. That is the whole point, we cannot pay down the debt if we are adding to it, and taxing the rich more won't eliminate the Obama deficit.

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

He was forced to do so. Do you remember who had control of Congress at the time and held his feet to the fire?

I m not really arguing partisanship................. taxing the rich is about the only option we have left to at least chip away at the debt because if you tax poorer people, especially now, you will crash the economy

Yeah...and guess where the debt came from. These figures are a matter of the debt bureau and can be verified:

.....................Total U S Debt....................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

You left out quite a bit. You know, the part where the debt will have doubled again by the time the latest occupant of the White House leaves, after accumulating more debt than all the other presidents combined. Sorry, but you don't get to act like the last 7 years didn't happen.

Of course he does, he is a lefty….history only starts when they wake up in the morning. And of course the fact that the problem isn't taxes, but excessive spending will never enter his brain either.

 

[hadit]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Need to get past the rhetoric and realize who pays taxes...

Unfortunately the chances of you figuring this out are pretty slim...

The wealthiest of Americans pay the bulk of our tax revenue...

The issue is when are you going to figure this out and quit electing the Liberal Left POS that manipulate with such basic divide and conquer issues?

if you play poker you may realize that those with more money on the table, generally have an advantage in gaining even more money.......same with an economy......

so the rich should pay more in taxes

also because history has shown that the government, no matter how much certain pols claim they want to cut...doesnt get cut.........so at least tax the rich enough so that we can pay down our debt and not become like greece.

1. The wealthy already pay more in taxes.
2. There isn't enough there to eliminate the Obama deficit and pay down the debt.
3. Any new revenue to the treasury would trigger an automatic feeding frenzy from the democrats that would more than completely swamp any gains with new spending.

Thinking you can just tax the rich more and fix the debt is a fool's dream.

well they need to pay more to help pay down the debt faster......

3. is a straw man argument, a convenient one for those wishing to bankrupt this country. Clinton is one Democrat that proves you wrong, he ran, I believe, a brief budget surplus. as maybe Obama has also.....both undoubtedly ran better budgets than the Bushes and Reagan.

You act as if you can just "make them pay it". You can't.

Do you not realize how many hundreds of wealthy have a salary of $1? Warren Buffet's salary is $100,000 a year.

What tax hike do you propose we pass, that will make the rich pay more tax?

Again, this whole ideology is exactly what Greece tried to do. They tried to "make the rich pay the debt"... and look how that turned out.

I am reminded of the infamous yacht tax that was supposed to really stick it to those rich SOB's. All it did was destroy the American yacht building business and eliminate some really good paying jobs. And it didn't generate any new revenue.

 

[hadit]

Did you know that Warren Buffet(who pays less taxes than his secretary)

He pays a smaller percentage not less...

That's a lie. He pays more and a larger percentage.

In August 2011, Warren Buffett wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times in which he made the assertion that his 2010 “federal tax rate” of 17.4 percent was 18.6 percentage points less than the 36.0 percent average rate paid by the 20 other workers in his office.


Buffett has been advocating for a minimum tax on top wage earners -- those like himself who benefit from the fact that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than regular earnings. His proposal, popularly known as the Buffett rule,(MIN 30% ON $1,000,000+ INCOMES!) has the support of the Obama administration but is strongly opposed by Republicans in Congress.


Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

Let me guess? Buffet is "wrong" because he uses the payroll taxes the office pays? LIKE THE CBO, TREASURY, etc do too when figuring EFFECTIVE tax rates?

There's nothing that stops Buffet from becoming a man who puts his money where his mouth is. The treasury will accept extra money from him. Naturally, he's all hat and no cattle.

 

[hadit]

Let's just make them pay 90%...

Let's make everyone pay 90%... starting with YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT.

All the way into the 1960's anyone who earned more than $300,000 a year paid 91% of the excess in taxes. 'Course back then CEO's earned 25 times what a carpenter or electrician made. Now the rich have fixed the game and they've got nearly all the money. They won't quit until America becomes a Lord/Serf society. If you count all the fees, taxes etc. that an average earner makes he, she's being taxed at twice the percentage of his/her gross income that the rich are. Payroll tax, state income tax, sales tax, federal excise tax, property tax, fees on everything from auto registration to a fishing license. The upper nuts are supposed to be paying 35%-40% but none of them do. Their lawyers and accountants see to that. I have a buddy in MS who owns a metal building construction company and he told me that if he ever had to pay more than 20% he would fire his accountant and hire a new one.

Liar.

Do you have trouble reading the English language??

CEO Pay in 2012 Was Extraordinarily High Relative to Typical Workers and Other High Earners | Economic Policy Institute

From 1978 to 2012, CEO compensation measured with options realized increased about 875 percent, a rise more than double stock market growth and substantially greater than the painfully slow 5.4 percent growth in a typical worker’s compensation over the same period.

Who cares? What difference does it make? The only reason that matters, is because you are consumed with greed and envy. The rest of us, who are not, don't care. I don't give a crap what my CEO makes. I agreed to work for an agreed wage. As long as he pays me what I am due, I'm fine with whatever he makes.

I don't even care how much money Paris Hilton has, and she didn't earn it. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if she pumps more into the economy in a single weekend shopping in Beverly Hills than I do in a year's living.

 

[hadit]

Let's make everyone pay 90%... starting with YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT.

Anger issues? Did you forget your meds?

I understand my shoe size is higher than your IQ...

It's glaringly obvious to the smart people that the "debater" who starts calling people childish names is not articulating a coherent, winning argument.