Obama's $80B tax cuts

[Finglefinn]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070918/ap_ ... bama_taxes

These fucking politicians haven't thought of a new idea in 35 years. Tax cuts for the middle class and make the wealthy pay for it. Don't these people study their own tax reports? The top 20% of earners already pay 70% of all income and SS taxes! How much more blood can be squeezed out of that turnip? Logic people, do you speak it? Why don't you drive every industry out of the country to Mexico and Asia while you're at it!

And what about the myriad of tax increases Obama has suggested, like his health care plan and other tax cuts President Bush implemented that Obama has said he would eliminate?

What are you going to do, Senator? Cut taxes or implement new ones?

[Harlowe]

It doesn't matter how much of the total collected they contribute. It's what % of their income they pay that matters.

Frankly, I think we should all pay the same % of our income no matter how low or high that income is.

[Lurker]

Frankly, I think we should all pay the same % of our income no matter how low or high that income is.

We've been over the and over this. We already have a flat tax structure in this country when all types of taxes are taken into account.

How much more blood can be squeezed out of that turnip?

There's no more persecuted group in America than the rich. My heart really goes out to them.

What are you going to do, Senator? Cut taxes or implement new ones?

Both. The Clinton tax structure was a proven success and the faster we return to something like that the better.

[Kulaf]

You mean the Reagan tax structure that Clinton adopted.

[Trollbait]

Taxes are always going to be a losing line for democrats.

[Trollbait]

We've been over the and over this. We already have a flat tax structure in this country when all types of taxes are taken into account.

Then what is your beef with making it official and getting rid of all the different types? I mean, if we already have a flat tax structure and all, what could be the harm in simplifying it? Unless, of course, you are not really being honest with the numbers...

There's no more persecuted group in America than the rich. My heart really goes out to them.

Over tax the rich and it is always the poor who lose out. A rich person is going to find a way to stay rich. If that means moving his money elsewhere then he will and usually that means some working class schmoes will be out of jobs.

[Lurker]

You mean the Reagan tax structure that Clinton adopted.

No, I mean Clinton's 1993 tax reform which included targeted middle class tax cuts and small increase on the top two percent. Reagan raised taxes on the poor and middle class several times after he found out his initial tax cuts led to huge deficits.

Then what is your beef with making it official and getting rid of all the different types? I mean, if we already have a flat tax structure and all, what could be the harm in simplifying it?

I haven't seen a workable proposal for a national flat tax.

Over tax the rich and it is always the poor who lose out. A rich person is going to find a way to stay rich.

They weren't over taxed in the 90's.

[Trollbait]

I haven't seen a workable proposal for a national flat tax.

But you just said we already have one.....

They weren't over taxed in the 90's.

From who's perch?

[Lurker]

I haven't seen a workable proposal for a national flat tax.

But you just said we already have one.....

No, I said that when all types of taxes are taken into account we have a flat tax structure. I haven't seen a proposal for a national flat tax that is workable since none of them properly fund the governement. They all pick some low number seemingly at random, most likely because the number polls well with focus groups.

From who's perch?

The Federal Government was properly funded, the economy was doing well, the wealthy were getting more wealthy, and the poor and middle class were doing ok too. That's the perspective I look from.

[Trollbait]

The Federal Government was OVERLY funded

Fixed it for you.

Any time the government runs with a surplus it means they took in too much money. My money.

That's the perspective I look from.

No, I said that when all types of taxes are taken into account we have a flat tax structure.

So, all we have to do is figure out what that flat percentage is that you say we already have and then we can do it, right? Right?

[Kulaf]

No, I mean Clinton's 1993 tax reform which included targeted middle class tax cuts and small increase on the top two percent. Reagan raised taxes on the poor and middle class several times after he found out his initial tax cuts led to huge deficits.

You mean after Congress failed to follow his budget by cutting spending.

[Lurker]

Any time the government runs with a surplus it means they took in too much money. My money.

How do you propose we pay off our debt then, or pay back the money that we've 'borrowed' from Social Security?

So, all we have to do is figure out what that flat percentage is that you say we already have and then we can do it, right? Right?

It's a little more complicated than that since you'd have to do away with all State and consumption taxes and then figure out how to fund all the things that money went to. A national flat tax would make everything much more complicated than it currently is, but in theory, a flat tax about 20 percentage points higher than any I've seen proposed might work.

You mean after Congress failed to follow his budget by cutting spending.

History isn't one of your strong suits, Kulaf. You can't get a handle on events from a few years ago, so I'll give you a pass on not knowing that Clintons budget proposals were less than what the Republican congress spent, and that Clinton often fought with the Republican congress to make sure fiscal responsibility was maintained.

[Kulaf]

I was refering to Reagan o'wise one. The Democratically controlled Congress headed by Tip "I never met a spending bill I didn't like" O'Neal.

[Lurker]

Ah, I see what you were saying. Yeah, they certainly could have spent less, but they couldn't have made up all the Reagan deficit with spending cuts. Restoring revenue through tax increases was necessary and to Reagans credit he did increase taxes. And of course, the Democrats under Reagan didn't go as nuts as the Republicans under Dubya.

[Partha]

Create your own damn nation, then, you whiners. Do you know what the tax rates were like for the rich (which you ain't, anyways) when our Golden Age in the postwar boom were like?

[Kulaf]

Do you know what the tax rates were prior to FDR?

[Ddrak]

The top 20% of earners already pay 70% of all income and SS taxes! How much more blood can be squeezed out of that turnip?

Do you really want a candid answer? If that number is correct (and I think it's pretty close), then you could raise their taxes by about an extra half, still have a lower tax rate than most of the industrialized world and completely eliminate income tax from anyone who earns less than about 250k/year.

You could possibly even get a lot of votes if you tried it - after all, there's a lot more votes in the low and middle class than the "top 20%".

Dd

[Klast Brell]

You say the 20% percent pay 70% of the taxes. Fine.

Take a moment to look up what percentage of all wealth they earn. Go ahead. I can wait.

Done yet?

OK. Now that you have a little perspective on the situation how much should we raise their taxes to make it "Fair"?

[Embar Angylwrath]

You say the 20% percent pay 70% of the taxes. Fine.

Take a moment to look up what percentage of all wealth they earn. Go ahead. I can wait.

Done yet?

OK. Now that you have a little perspective on the situation how much should we raise their taxes to make it "Fair"?

More entitlement bullshit. Gimme gimme gimme gimme.

A person shouldn't be penalized for making any level of income. How about this Klast. Would you be ok with forced sterilization for people who contribute little to no tax revenue, yet pull an inordinate share of the money from entitlement programs? How about removing the ovaries and testicles of people who show an inability to live within means, yet continue to have children? Would you support that?

[Partha]

Listen to you whine. We already know you'd squirrel away as much of your cash into some type of tax haven, anyways, Embar - governments are not built to provide balm for the hurt feelings of sociopaths like yourself.