Let's keep things in perspective. Our current tax rates for the wealthy have never been lower in our lifetimes (and then some), and yet we're worse off now than we were then. These ridiculous Bush tax cuts for the wealthy need to go. I do not want to hurt small business in any way, but let's face it. The majority of the wealthy do not contribute to job creation, and they are laughing all the way to the bank. Is it so much to ask of them that they pay the same tax rates that the previous generations of the wealthy have paid in the past?

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

One solution would be to get rid of the special tax treatment for capital gains. That's why people like Warren Buffet pays a lower percentage of taxes than his secretary does. Sounds a little ass backwards, right?

It's inherently unfair for some to pay a higher rate than others, so why ask them to pay even more than the MORE that they already pay? Read this completely unbiased link with simple and fast facts, and then try to say that the "rich" should do more.

http://www.ehow.com/about_5417525_not-p ... e-tax.html

Tax hikes subsidize gov't waste. If the current income tax revenue isn't enough it's on the gov't to trim their own fat.

Correlation does not equal causation.

They were set to expire before Obama extended them.

Do you have some sort of cartoon character in your head called Mr. Moneybags who likes to cheat the government, shit on poor people and just live off a trust fund for their entire life?
Because that statement is laughable.
No, but class warfare is unbecoming.

How about more perspective.
Taxing the top 10% of earners 100% of their income....won't cover this YEAR'S deficit, much less the debt we already have and the debt in the pipeline.

We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
Arguing for higher taxes as a solution to our systemic debt just isn't serious.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Response times, my friend. Our military can have troops in any country in under 6 hours, and probably even faster than that.

_________________

Understood, but is it worth it? Can we get troops into any country from the US in 14 hours or something like that?

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

I can't speak to mission response times but as a medic I know that having base hospitals in Italy, Turkey and Germany are a must for wars in the Middle East.

_________________

The part about anything gov't wise lately, is that I feel I can do NOTHING to stop it.

_________________

I didn't make any inference that rich people hate the poor and cheat the government. I'm talking strictly about job creation. I will use myself as an example and I'm not even making 6 figures. I am fortunate in that I am able to save a lot of the money I earn, and that's what I do. I invest it. That's good for me and it's a tiny, tiny stimulus for the economy. We have fiscal issues and people like me should be paying more in taxes. If on the other hand, I was using my excess money to start a business and hire people, then that would completely different and I should get tax breaks for directly contributing to the economy.

Why is it whenever anyone makes any comment about the priveledged, you immediately play the class warfare card? Taxing people appropriately is not class warfare, it is what is moral and just. I bet Marie Antoinette was a bit touchy about class warfare, too. How'd that work out for her?

As for your last point, of course raising taxes is not the only answer, and I never said it was. We do not have strictly a spending problem. We have a FISCAL problem, and any suggestion that we don't need to do anything about increasing revenues is downright irresponsible. In fact, this stubborn refusal by many on the right to consider new revenues is making it more difficult to for Congress to agree on what to cut and by how much. We need people who can compromise. We do not need idealogues.

_________________
This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.
--Emerson

Raise revenues all you want, it doesn't address our problems.



See, that's YOU playing class warfare, not me.
As for the job creation part, I'll just go check out the bum on the corner and ask him for a job.
Your argument makes no sense. Of course it's wealthy people (and wealthy corporations) who create jobs.

Recently, NYS decided they weren't taxing the rich enough...why don't you go ahead and tell the rest of the country how that's working out for you guys.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

There was a survey conducted by CNN which asked people what they feel is best for solving the debt crisis. Any percentages that do not equal 100 is because some people checked that they have no opinion.

-63% of people feel the wealthy should see a tax increase and 62% of those polled said that the increases should go towards helping low income individuals. This is with 36% saying no tax increases and 34% saying taxes on the wealthy should be kept low to stimulate the economy.

-57% want a decrease in spending, with 40% saying no spending cuts.

-47% of people want to decrease defense spending; 53% said no decrease (I wonder if their opinion would change if they really knew how the money was being spent in some cases).

-35% said they want to see major changes to SS and Medicare; 64% do not

-12% want tax increases on the middle class; 87% do not

You can see the PDF here, along with the sampling error and other statistical data: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/image ... .aug10.pdf

Basically, this poll tells me that people see the rich not being taxed more as unjust, but they also do not want to reform anything. We can't increase taxes and keep spending at the level we are because raising revenue is simply not going to be enough. Not to mention that those who feel any tax increases go towards helping the low income individuals sounds like they're okay with spending and not cutting, which isn't really going to do anything.

I'm all for government programs helping people out, especially since I know I wouldn't be going to school today if it wasn't for government assistance. I also know that I will become a contributing member to society once I graduate and find a job and I am really grateful that I've been given the opportunity to go to school. Not many kids who grew up where I did are going to have the same luxury and will probably live in a vicious cycle of poverty. I think I'm blessed for getting where I am today, but it came with a lot of hard work, too.

At the same time, though, low income individuals can't keep looking to the rich to help them out. I understand being down on your luck and everything and I'm more than willing to help someone for an interim period of time while they get back on their feet, but government assistance is not something you should be completely dependent on for your entire life.

Something has got to give. We need to balance the demands, otherwise it's only going to get worse.

I personally think we should get rid of the special treatment capital gains get, or at least raise the rates on them.

No one wants to give up their entitlements.
Politicians don't want to cut entitlements because they won't get re-elected if they take away X from special interest group X.

Yet there is no path forward without major entitlement reform.

People arguing about tax increases and cuts to discretionary spending are completely skirting the issue.

Someone is going to have to get screwed here because our government over-promised what it can deliver.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Anyone who thinks the only solution to the situation is ONLY tax increases or ONLY spending cuts is simply an ideologue.

Entitlements needs reform. There is major waste and cost savings to be had.

Taxes need reform. The wealthy are getting too many breaks.

Saying that entitlements are the major problem is a straight up lie.They need fixing, but they're NOT the reason we're running a massive deficit.

NYS enjoys an unemployment rate that's about 2% lower than the nations. I guess we're waiting on the 'trickle-down' effect of those tax hikes to ruin the job market?

BTW, how's California's fiscal sit(right back at ya bro)?

In such uncertain economic times there is little job creation anyways. Investors are going to take their additional wealth from the Bush tax cuts, and sit on the sidelines with them making the economy more and more stale. It's all partisan bs anyways. Dems claim the stimulus wasn't big enough while Bohner and his pals claim he spends too much(although what Bush spent was just fine).

One last comment about your comment about Obama extending the Bush credits. I'm going to guess you believe he wanted them extended? Well, when he talks about people paying their "fair share", I'm assuming he means the Bush tax cuts. Clearly the wealthy campaign supporters on the right(and the bat-shit tea-partiers) holding the countries ass to the fire to protect them is why they haven't been repealed. Just saying.

My personal opinion on the whole shitstorm is to take a monster bite out of the defense spending. Cutting aid to our domestic programs should come only after the defense has been gutted. I see C-130's flying around ALL FUCKING DAY. That can't be cheap. Like Beth said, if any of the idiots polled knew what the DOD wastes, that number should be in the 90 percentiles. Those people have been fear mongered into thinking we need all that spending.

Simple fiscal math.

I can invest in bond funds making 8%, and pay a reduced capital gains tax on my earnings there. I'll probably net about 6% after tax, for doing nothing, at minimal risk. (Remember that in the event a company goes tits up, bonds are paid off before stockholders, so you have less risk being in bonds.)

OR

I can invest my money in my existing business, or start a new one. It's a significantly larger risk, and if I do ok I'll make 6% or so.

What incentive do I have to create a job, or invest in my business? I can make more money doing NOTHING but calling my broker.

Bonds are taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Dividends, selling investment property, etc., all result in reduced capital gains tax rates.

Just being nitpicky. Sorry

I should have said bond funds, not bonds. Brain fart.

My bond fund income has been taxed at the capital gains rates, unless my accountant has been doing it wrong.

My first post in this thread was all about tax reform....my point is soaking the "rich" isn't the reform that's needed. The abolition of our distorted and convoluted code is. We need a flat tax and a small VAT and no more loopholes.

So I agree with you...major tax and entitlement reform is the only way out.


Really? All sunshine and roses eh?
I'm sure that's why BTG still lives there.
http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/new-yor ... x-20110803
You guys just lost seats in the house for a reason.


Well California has been on this path for a very long time...would be kind of stupid if the whole nation didn't notice what happened and copied us wouldn't it?

All he had to do was NOT sign a piece of paper. Maybe his resolve is even less than I give him credit for (which is somewhere around the resolve possessed by a 4 year old).
Sorry, you can't talk your way out of that.
He signed it.

That may help short term with deficits, but it would not solve the problem.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Wasn't insinuating you didn't. Just happened to be putting down thoughts. (I don't necessarily agree on the flat tax/VAT idea for my reasons listed above, but still agree reform is needed.)

No, that part is right. I read that today while studying for the CPA exam. Oh joy.