The amount of money that this law is projected to raise is only 47 Billion over a decade. If you do the simple math and divide that by 10 years that is only 4.7 Billion per year. The US spends about 11 BILLION PER DAY! This also doesn’t average out what the impact will be from the lost revenue of jobs that will be lost from this proposed Obama Tax Hike…......
Rather than taking money from people and then demonize them for being successful, I’ll wager most of us, both left and right could go through the US Budget and carve out 4.7 Billion in a lot of places….A whole heck of a lot of places.
The President just signed a free trade deal with Columbia that will make sell-outs like Wal-mart happy and will cost more American Jobs to be outsourced. I am picking on Obama, but all presidents in the last 50 years have gradually sold us out.
Why would I or anyone else have to pay more in income tax than someone who makes millions of dollars? Seriously, why would anyone who makes enough money to scrape by have to pay more than someone who makes way more than they need?
It’s been proven over and over again the trickle down deal doesn’t work. In fact, we are digging out of that concept now. Remember all that surplus we had under Clinton? Well, it was gone when Bush made his tax cuts for the rich folks.
All the Buffett rule does is take the tax law back to the Clinton era where it clearly worked.
As for the new deal with South America I don’t know enough about it to comment.
Again, why in the hell would anyone take a position against there best interests? Just don’t get it. Instead of returning our economy back to a surplus, you and the rich folks who have brain washed you want to put us in the same place that gave us a depression. For them they got everything to gain….. like 150-175k a year in personal revenue. And you? Your money you pay in taxes is helping succeed to that. And, they don’t share dude. They are greedy.
That is ultimately what this is all about. Not greed, but envy. When in the blue hell did it become a crime for a person in the United States to be successful and to want to keep the fruits of your good fortune?
Instead of complaining why the wealthy pay a lower percentage than a typical middle class worker, why not demand that all Americans have their tax rates LOWERED to that same 20% or so level and also demand that the government cut wasteful spending and stupid loan guarantees before soaking the American people?
You would do well to look at the Columbia Free Trade deal that POTUS just signed. Another venue to outsource more American Jobs which mean the additional lack of capital will result in more tax hikes on Americans in the future to compensate for lost tax revenue that is coming down the road due to this….Heaven forbid we have a Tariff to make other nations pay to play in our yard…...
Why would I or anyone else have to pay more in income tax than someone who makes millions of dollars? Seriously, why would anyone who makes enough money to scrape by have to pay more than someone who makes way more than they need?
It’s been proven over and over again the trickle down deal doesn’t work. In fact, we are digging out of that concept now. Remember all that surplus we had under Clinton? Well, it was gone when Bush made his tax cuts for the rich folks.
All the Buffett rule does is take the tax law back to the Clinton era where it clearly worked.
As for the new deal with South America I don’t know enough about it to comment.
Again, why in the hell would anyone take a position against there best interests? Just don’t get it. Instead of returning our economy back to a surplus, you and the rich folks who have brain washed you want to put us in the same place that gave us a depression. For them they got everything to gain….. like 150-175k a year in personal revenue. And you? Your money you pay in taxes is helping succeed to that. And, they don’t share dude. They are greedy.
The Buffet Rule would not take us back to a surplus - not even close. I’m all for everyone paying what they should, but anyone with a calculator can figure out that this is not a serious attempt to address the deficit.
All I know… is that if I earned the money… It’s mine… and if you want to steal the money out of my wallet, you can pry it out of my cold dead hands.
Why do we have treat successful people like villains?? Wheat do you think it takes to get that wealth in the first place?? They busted their ass to get that!!!
In 2010, Americans making over 50,000 Dollars per year paid 93.3% of the federal taxes in America or only about 85 million people. Furthermore, people who didn’t pay any income tax received $105 billion in refundable tax credits from the IRS.
In short there are a lot of people that don’t have a skin in the game that are getting a lot of government money and they want more!......
If the President is actually concerned about the deficit and the debt, why has he never considered the recommendations made by the bi-partisan debt and deficit commission that he appointed? Was that commission another stunt? These people were appointed with the explanation that the President was very serious and concerned about the issue. They worked long hours and very hard to create recommendations. The President has never addressed or taken seriously their recommendations. It’s interesting to note that their recommendations were to move in the opposite direction from what the President is doing. However, his followers will continue to believe that this is the answer to the problem despite the fact that the numbers are not even close.
As for Mr. Buffet, why does Mr. Obama tolerate such hypocrisy? Is it because his words match those of Obama despite the fact that his actions don’t? I guess words are okay with some. Buffet expressed concern that his tax rate was lower than his secretary’s. However, he is paying lawyers more than his secretary’s salary to avoid paying taxes the IRS says he owes. For those that haven’t seen it, this is a current case.
Curggr, he did… and the Speaker agreed with it Simpson Bowles commission too. Then boom! The Tea Party wackos took over and wouldn’t have any part of a bi partisan anything.
Curggr, he did… and the Speaker agreed with it Simpson Bowles commission too. Then boom! The Tea Party wackos took over and wouldn’t have any part of a bi partisan anything.
Come on man, watch something else but Fox.
You’re buying lip service. He introduced a budget proposal with nothing similar to anything from that commission. The Ryan plan is closer to that than what the President introduced. The Democrat controlled senate hasn’t passed a budget since 2009 and will not even discuss the one passed by the house. They didn’t amend it and introduce anything from the commission. You’re listening to words and completely ignoring what people actually do.
Curggr, he did… and the Speaker agreed with it Simpson Bowles commission too. Then boom! The Tea Party wackos took over and wouldn’t have any part of a bi partisan anything.
Come on man, watch something else but Fox.
You’re buying lip service. He introduced a budget proposal with nothing similar to anything from that commission. The Ryan plan is closer to that than what the President introduced. The Democrat controlled senate hasn’t passed a budget since 2009 and will not even discuss the one passed by the house. They didn’t amend it and introduce anything from the commission. You’re listening to words and completely ignoring what people actually do.
You and that are a great example for the millions who hear the read things the brain washed say, and write, and don’t understand how in the heck you and they can take that position. Right there, in black and white is Example A. Completely misinformed, share a Fox News talking point, that I know you honestly believe is true….. and is completely not true.
The reality is the house tea party radicals nitched the Simpson Bowles before it could even get in introduced, and like the wackos, President Obama dug in and gave them something. Why in the heck do you think our gov almost shut down until your wackos caved a few months ago? Dude, he put together the commission, do you honestly think said no to them after he put them together? Again, stop watching Fox.
But ok, your not voting for Obama under and circumstance, so you can believe what you want. And be incredibly disappointed and confused in November when he’s re-elected.
Here-
There was good political logic behind Obama’s cautious strategy. He was hoping a big deal could be crafted in private, and he knew that his public embrace of Simpson-Bowles in late 2010 would make it radioactive to Republicans in the House, who already said they opposed it, while infuriating the left by endorsing entitlement cuts without further negotiating. The irony is that now the opposite has happened. Republicans are increasingly embracing Simpson Bowles as an anti-Obama plan, even though it jibes, with the exception of a few details, with the sort of policy that Obama would love to make his legacy. Time Magazine or is that the liberal established media too?
Curggr, he did… and the Speaker agreed with it Simpson Bowles commission too. Then boom! The Tea Party wackos took over and wouldn’t have any part of a bi partisan anything.
Come on man, watch something else but Fox.
You’re buying lip service. He introduced a budget proposal with nothing similar to anything from that commission. The Ryan plan is closer to that than what the President introduced. The Democrat controlled senate hasn’t passed a budget since 2009 and will not even discuss the one passed by the house. They didn’t amend it and introduce anything from the commission. You’re listening to words and completely ignoring what people actually do.
You and that are a great example for the millions who hear the read things the brain washed say, and write, and don’t understand how in the heck you and they can take that position. Right there, in black and white is Example A. Completely misinformed, share a Fox News talking point, that I know you honestly believe is true….. and is completely not true.
The reality is the house tea party radicals nitched the Simpson Bowles before it could even get in introduced, and like the wackos, President Obama dug in and gave them something. Why in the heck do you think our gov almost shut down until your wackos caved a few months ago? Dude, he put together the commission, do you honestly think said no to them after he put them together? Again, stop watching Fox.
But ok, your not voting for Obama under and circumstance, so you can believe what you want. And be incredibly disappointed and confused in November when he’s re-elected.
Here-
There was good political logic behind Obama’s cautious strategy. He was hoping a big deal could be crafted in private, and he knew that his public embrace of Simpson-Bowles in late 2010 would make it radioactive to Republicans in the House, who already said they opposed it, while infuriating the left by endorsing entitlement cuts without further negotiating. The irony is that now the opposite has happened. Republicans are increasingly embracing Simpson Bowles as an anti-Obama plan, even though it jibes, with the exception of a few details, with the sort of policy that Obama would love to make his legacy. Time Magazine or is that the liberal established media too?
Are you quoting an editorial as news? Maybe that’s the problem.
Secondly, does your news source, whatever it is, say that the Senate has actually passed a budget since the 09 budget and I missed it? Can you give me a link to the budgets for 2010, 2011, and 2012 from the Senate? Did the President’s proposal really have anything to do with the commission?
The Republicans did have some concerns with it, off course. Unfortunately a bipartisan commission doesn’t mean the rest of the government is bipartisan.
Two of the major points of it were to cut entitlement spending and flatten tax rates. This very thread is about the opposite of flattening tax rates so what did my news source miss? The President’s budget was run out of Congress by both sides because it was so far fetched. Opposing information from another source - was there another mystery vote where they likes is proposal? He is touring the country looking for new entitlements to add whether it’s paying for student loans or anything else that will get votes. Is there another dimension where he isn’t doing that? I’ve seen that covered on many news sources.
Please tell me what news sources disputes these facts that I have just laid out to you? I don’t care about some guy’s opinion that Obama is trying to trick everyone into fiscal responsibility. If he is then he must know that he has no leadership skills because he’s planning for the reality that people will do the opposite of what he says.
That is ultimately what this is all about. Not greed, but envy. When in the blue hell did it become a crime for a person in the United States to be successful and to want to keep the fruits of your good fortune?
When in the blue hell did it become a crime for a person in the United States to not be wildly successful and yet still want to cling to what little he or she could make?
