Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   bhinkle said, 12 months ago

   Oh sure, the Repubs are at it again. So what if countries around the world are failing because of debt? We’re America. Besides, it will be 4 years before it has to be a topic for the Media. We’ve got to re-elect Obama so we can spend our way out of the Recession and bring social ‘rightness’ to the under-advantaged. It isn’t enough that we are feeding them breakfast, lunch and dinner, food-stamps, WIC, Section 8; they are at-risk. And with ACORN temporarily re-building under a new name – someone has to help those who won’t help themselves. And it isn’t like it is real money – it is Federal Funds!
2. 

   hanmari said, 12 months ago

   Obama gleefully is awaiting January 1st when revenues spike. He already has his next budget filled with incredible spending increases to take advantage of the added income. Do you think they will stop borrowing to make up the difference for any potential budget gaps? Never! The added revenue will only make them hungry for more tax increases. And the irony will be that as tax rates go up, realized revenues will actually decrease, as the tax increases will burden an already weakened economy and cause more private businesses to fold. But that’s okay to Mr. Obama, because “the private sector is doing just fine”
3. 

   dtroutma said, 12 months ago

   RAISE TAXES you MORONS! It’s simple math, raise your income to meet needs. Gee, even the Articles of Confederation called for that! The Constitution calls for it! OH, but then they didn’t recognize that Corporations were “citizens”. Also, btw, in those Articles of Confederation, it is SPECIFICALLY the “land owners” and wealthy who are called upon to raise those taxes in the states, to support the national government! The Constitution actually takes the same line, but today’s “constructionist” SCOTUS, ignores it all, and the Republicans are afraid taxes might burn the fingers of those eating caviar, filet mignon, and drinking Champaign, preferring to tax the kitchen help.
4. 

   Wraithkin said, 12 months ago

   Trout, ease up on the name calling. It’s beneath you.
   
   First off, you are talking about raising revenue to meet the demands of the government’s spending, which is included in the capabilities of the US Government. But the problem is that the federal government doesn’t reciprocate and decrease spending to shrink the gap. You will never get Republican support for a tax increase without corresponding spending cuts.
   
   At the same time, there is a lot of evidence out there that supports what hanmari is saying. When you raise taxes, yes, you will see a short-term revenue spike as people are having more money taken from them. But what will happen is it will (overnight) increase the cost of doing business in America. Why? Because many of those “making more than 250k a year” are sole-proprietorships that file their taxes as individuals. These small businesses represent 70% of new jobs added in the US every year. You make things more expensive for them, and they will either stop hiring, or they will collapse under the new tax burden.
   
   If you look at the CEO’s and the other “non-organizational rich,” you will see one of two things happening. One, they will find a way to conceal their holdings from the US government because they earned that money, and they want to keep it. Or Two, you will see them (or the businesses they own) pass the cost on to the consumers, which will drive up costs for those “who can least afford them.” Either way you slice it, revenues for the federal government will not spike like you think they will.
   
   Here’s also an aside: If you taxed all those that make more than 250k a year at 100% (i.e. siezed all assets earned per year), you still wouldn’t close the budgetary deficit. Spending must be cut in order to balance the budget.
   
   Here’s a counter to what you’re suggesting: Instead of raising or lowering taxes on specific people (a la class warfare), you apply a flat rate (or two flat rates, as in the Ryan plan — which has Democratic support, by the by) across the board, no exceptions, no exemptions. Then, at the same time, you slash spending across the board to make all the “gimme” programs sustainable, without hollowing out our military (because one of the few responsibilities of the federal government is to provide for the common defense).
   
   Stop listening to the partisan hacks out there and realize that just taking in more money is not going to solve the problem. Taking in more money without cutting up the credit card will only encourage them to ring up an even higher tab on that credit card. Eventually, you have to pay the bill.
5. 

   denis1112 said, 12 months ago

   @dtroutma

   You morons killed the economy so there are way fewer to pay taxes.There are thousands of job openings for those that can pass a drug test and criminal background check,but that leaves out most dems down at the projects,several of my neighbors,and the OWS crowd.Since you don’t pay taxes it’s no wonder you want to raise them on anyone with a job.Just stay at home and get those disability checks from the government.Stop yelling you want more .
6. 

   yohannbiimu said, 12 months ago

   @dtroutma

   Everything that Obama is doing is ensuring a weak economy, essentially because everything that he’s done has been to strengthen the public (unproductive) sector, but he’s weakened the private. Obama KNOWS that when you lower taxes for the private sector that revenues increase (he said so in 2008 during one of the debates); however, he believes in raising taxes out of “fairness.” History is against you here. Harding and Coolidge lowered taxes and cut spending (during the 1920 depression), and the economy boomed (and the entire country benefited). Hoover raised taxes and increased government spending, and the 1929 crash resulted. FDR campaigned against Hoover’s policies, won the presidency, increased spending and taxes even more, and he made a depression (which was not as bad as the one in 1920) “GREAT.” FDR exacerbated the economic problems, just as Obama has done with his mindless spending and hostility towards the productive sector. Your endless cries for taxes against cigar-chomping, caviar-swilling billionaires will do NOTHING to end the ever-rising debt and destruction of our currency. Europe is on the verge of a collapse, and yet, did you know that the “EURO” is in better shape than the US Dollar? You are being duped by all of your “fairness” and “economic justice” BS. You have never experienced entrepreneurial free market capitalism at any time in your life, and yet you scream bloody murder that it is to blame for everything. Government dictating the economic rules have destroyed everything. They have picked the winners and losers, and we’ve all suffered from it (all except for the picked winners). You have sold your soul to a party that is as guilty as anyone when it comes to choosing which people will gain, and who will suffer, and yet you throw all of the guilt upon the GOP. You are blind and dumb of the truth about the progressive evil that is seeped in BOTH parties that is enslaving the whole of this country. When I listen to you, I get the idea that you WANT to be shackled and told what to do every moment of your life. You see a tiny minority who eats filet mignon, and you say “I don’t care what happens to me, so long as you punish people who eat filet mignon.” That is deranged. Wake up.
7. 

   Eryx said, 12 months ago

   @hanmari

   “Obama gleefully is awaiting January 1st when revenues spike. He already has his next budget filled with incredible spending increases to take advantage of the added income.” So, you are already acknowledging that Obama will be reelected?
8. 

   yohannbiimu said, 12 months ago

   @hanmari

   Obama has operated without a budget throughout his presidency (including the years when he had a pass-anything congress in his back pocket). His fiscal irresponsibility is unprecedented.
9. 

   Eryx said, 12 months ago

   @yohannbiimu

   Do you even read your own posts? Obama would be ensuring a weak economy because that would benefit him how? The private employment level has improved, but the public sector has experienced low growth. Could that be because the GOP has blocked bills that would have been fixing/improving roads during the warm season? Our currency is doing rather well right now, our ability to borrow at the lowest rates is about good as it is possible to achieve. I could go on, but why bother?
10. 

    Jeff Kiser said, 12 months ago

    As the private sector weakens, the public sector becomes more influential. Would that help or hurt President Obama as an advocate of increasing the public sector?
11. 

    braindead08 said, 12 months ago

    @Wraithkin

    Why two flat rates? Why not just one? And, you honestly believe that a flat rate would make exemptions and tax breaks for special interests go away?
12. 

    onguard said, 12 months ago

    @

    In the Scotch again I see, the 91% rate was on adjusted income AFTER the income amount was reduced by many allowable deductions. The effective rate, Tax actually collect as a percentage of gross income after deductions was far lower in some cases it could be 0%.
13. 

    Ms. Ima said, 12 months ago

    What’s the democrats solution? Spend more because the Bush tax cuts are going to expire soon and the excess money held by the general population will be flooding to the government for their spending pleasure.
14. 

    josefw said, 12 months ago

    @yohannbiimu

    Nice post, thank you!
15. 

    josefw said, 12 months ago

    @

    It’s not a mule, it’s an ASS!
16. Load the rest of the comments (4).