Tom Toles for April 29, 2013

  1. Madmen icon
    McSpook  almost 11 years ago

    You may indeed be Superman.Bravo.

     •  Reply
  2. Coloradofiedcalifornia
    californicated1  almost 11 years ago

    Don’t forget the shills.…The GOP could use some bigger shills.

     •  Reply
  3. Missing large
    frodo1008  almost 11 years ago

    While I am certainly not an ultra conservative or even a conservative, you do understand that none of the things that you are for are going to happen in the current atmosphere in the US government. So it would be better to find some things more towards the middle of the political spectrum that might even stand a chance of happening. The one thing that is at least somewhat more hopeful is that it would seem that many economists now believe that the American economy is going to improve enough that the deficits are going to continue to decrease, and then at least some of these things might become more possible. I know that I will be castigated by some on here for even being that hopeful, but I was born an optimistic American, and I intend to stay that way!!

     •  Reply
  4. 100 8161
    chazandru  almost 11 years ago

    Hello Night Gaunt,

    In 2010, 2 researchers explained how austerity worked. In 2013, a student on assignment to research the research of researchers, discovered the original work might be wrong.^http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22223190^This supports your comment. ^I’ve always been part of the group that believes you need to spend money to make money. I wish the job creators would do it, but if they won’t, our infrastructure needs enough help that our gov’t should. Every time a gas or oil pipe bursts, or bridge ‘breaks’, or industrial site fails to ‘self regulate’ the US gov’t has to step in and it costs money. Fines and penalties are not deterrents and are often part of the cost of doing business. And the politicians just play their games. ^I do not trust the Dems to stand up to corporate and union donors any more than I do the Republicans. Both sides are playing ‘shell games’ with the American public and work harder to keep themselves in office and Americans divided than they do to fulfill their oaths to their country and those who elected them.@ Robert Landers – The founders were optimists, how else could they have dared consider standing up to a “super power” like Britain. There is a strong argument that the best and greatest of our countrymen were optimists. Thank you for another great comment!@ Radish – Hope you check out the BBC link, I think you’ll like it too. Keep up the good postings Radical-ish Neighbor!Respectfully,C.

     •  Reply
  5. Missing large
    Doughfoot  almost 11 years ago

    Man’s proclivity for evil makes government necessary, man’s capacity for good makes government possible.

     •  Reply
  6. Cb1
    CasualBrowser  almost 11 years ago

    Are you saying that taxing the top 10% destroys them? If so, did we destroy them in the 1940’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s?

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    fofinho  almost 11 years ago

    It seems that Germany is tired of bailing out the countries that don’t know how to grown their economies or live within their means.

     •  Reply
  8. Cat7
    rockngolfer  almost 11 years ago

    The Harvard study that was used to push austerity was flawed.A graduate student discovered the problems, and he was on either Colbert or Stewart’s show.

     •  Reply
  9. All seeing eye
    Chillbilly  almost 11 years ago

    The top 10% should pay most of the taxes because they eat away at the country as if it were a trough full of caviar and brandy.

    In NY, even though we do pay high taxes, it’s not 60% unless you’re too dumb to hire an accountant for $250 a year to do your taxes.

    Those who don’t like it here: move to Texassippi.

     •  Reply
  10. Reagan ears
    d_legendary1  almost 11 years ago

    Must you sound like a screaming idiot? Those people paid their taxes, just not the federal taxes. They did pay Social Security and Medicare, however.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    hippogriff  almost 11 years ago

    Respectful Troll: The basic problem is that we have believed their lie that corporations can only be punished by a fine – generally about 5% of what they made from that crime. As a result, it is considered “cost of business”.Ships can be arrested – post the notice on the mast and it cannot be moved. Why not with factories or office buildings? Use the courts to determine which executives are responsible and imprison them. The business can keep running much as under Chapter 11 bankruptcy to prevent hardship for innocent employees. Send a few 250 times average salary and perks executives to an ordinary federal prison (not club fed) and the problem will cure itself in a few years.

     •  Reply
  12. Missing large
    dairyman23  almost 11 years ago

    Top 10% of taxpayers make 45% of all income (2010)

     •  Reply
  13. Cheryl 149 3
    Justice22  almost 11 years ago

    The top 10% also have over 90 % of the income. Why don’t they pay 90% of the taxes?

     •  Reply
  14. St655
    Stormrider2112  almost 11 years ago

    Hey, someone doesn’t understand how the programs work!-Someone working for minimum wage as a full-time worker (40 hours per week) barely gets over the poverty line. Throw in a kid and you’re BELOW the poverty line working 50 hours a week (with overtime). Yeah, a few people skate through the system, but 80% of households collecting food stamps, welfare, or Medicaid have at least one person working. Parasites…lol…

     •  Reply
  15. Missing large
    ConserveGov  almost 11 years ago

    You could take 90% of the income of the top 2% of earners and it would only cover a few days worth of government.

    In doing so, those top 2% would protect their current wealth by freezing investment, laying off employees and spending less. This would just lower the amount of revenue coming into the fed.

    Unless, that is, if you libs went full commie and seized all of their private property and companies as well.

     •  Reply
  16. Missing large
    frodo1008  almost 11 years ago

    Two places where you are incorrect here. One: is, have you then looked at what an actual percentage of the top 10% in income that those 70% in taxes is of their actual income, or for that matter their actual wealth? Just as an instance of this the top 0.1% own some 40% of the wealth of this country, and the bottom 40% own some 0.1% of the wealth! And the wealth inequity is steadily getting much worse all the time. Two: just how much increased federal revenue can the federal government get by increasing the taxes of those at the bottom (or even the middle) of the income ladder? If it would not be zero, then it would be very close to zero.

    Nobody reasonable is saying that we should tax the wealthy out of existence, but if we are going to talk about reducing such programs as social security and Medicare that help to keep tens of millions of our deserving senior citizens out of abject poverty, then perhaps we could also talk about reasonable increases in the taxes of the top earners of this country. Or would you like (or the top wealthy) to see the ordinary middle class people of this country pushed into what happened in France in the 18th century? I know if I were wealthy, I certainly would not want to see that happen. In case you are wondering, it was called the French Revolution, and it certainly was not healthy for the top wealthy of that country! And if I were wealthy, I would happily pay more in federal taxes to see that it did not happen, now or in the future!!

     •  Reply
  17. Missing large
    oneoldhat  almost 11 years ago

    raise taxes like they did in 1937 and kill the recovery note to tom trolles no one is talking tax cut yes clark kent i agree have 75% tax rate on you

     •  Reply
  18. Reagan ears
    d_legendary1  almost 11 years ago

    “You link does not conflict with my post..”

    Sure it does. You said, “The Top 10% pay 70% of the Taxes”, and the link says that six of the 400 U.S. tax filers with the highest adjusted gross income (meaning AGI of at least $77 million) paid no U.S. income tax, while 19,551 U.S. households with income above $200,000 owed no U.S. or foreign income tax.

    “…you only prove you lack Civility.”

    When you can’t refute the facts, attack the poster. Brilliant.

     •  Reply
  19. Cheryl 149 3
    Justice22  almost 11 years ago

    ,,,,,You want me to believe Rush Limbaugh? Try another link..

     •  Reply
  20. Cheryl 149 3
    Justice22  almost 11 years ago

    Conservative Policy Research and AnalysisHeritage Foundation is a conservative research think tank based in Washington D.C. Read studies and papers on free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom …www.heritage.org – CachedDescription of THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION on their website.

     •  Reply
  21. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    The EIC has been paid out by both administrations for some years now. It goes not only to those who don’t earn enough to pay their overheads, and also to seniors whose inadequate stipend would otherwise land them on the streets.

    It’s important to government to keep the population of homeless small enough to be manageable. That is, they don’t want the thing to escalate to the point where the homeless population is as large as the sheltered, or larger. It is already much larger than they will admit to. Those homeless people are just so hard to count. They can be harassed from place to place, too, which makes a count more difficult.

    The choices are to put out that sop, which is more a matter of morale than financial security, or to demand that corporate industry put their money where their mouth is and bring the jobs back home.

    Since corporate industry is much more deeply committed to their quarterly bottom line than the state of the country, the government keeps doling out these little dribbles to keep the workforce from just giving up altogether; mass desperation is not something any government wants to deal with.

    Unless you are a major stockholder or CEO of a major corporation, it is in your best interest to support the continuance of the UIC, as well as those who receive it. Those people are struggling to maintain wholly inadequate employment, or in the case of seniors, just to survive.

    Most of the people you are complaining about are WORKING. The jobs are often dull and dangerous, but they take what they can get and hope they can keep things going. That piddling payment they might qualify for once a year often makes the difference between their ability to continue working, or ending up on the street.

    Don’t you support hard work?

     •  Reply
  22. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    I expect they’ll just deny it all, and keep beating the same old drum.

    At least until we can put a stop to the revolving doors between government regulatory agencies and the executives of the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

    We need to find a way to do that, too.

     •  Reply
  23. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    lol! I thought he was talking about the unions!

    Better go back and read again :-)

     •  Reply
  24. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Obviously because Congress, both sides of the aisle and stragglers too, are the Privileged Elite, and we are the unwashed masses.

    So much for equality …

     •  Reply
  25. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    What kind of sense does that make?

    Are you saying that all the country’s wealth is in the hands of Democrats?

    Do you consider the Bushes ‘middle class’? Or any of their bloated cronies?

    I. Give. Up.

     •  Reply
  26. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    If that was the legal rate at the time.

    The difference is that it would leave me a LOT more disposable income than I was getting on W2 rates.

     •  Reply
  27. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Drop that last zero. I don’t know where you got that number, but it must be straight off Fox.

     •  Reply
  28. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Onguard, NOBODY is saying that, or certainly not to me.

    Apart from the fact that those people don’t keep their money in this country, at that level the a substantial portion, if not the bulk of their income comes from capital gains, on which they pay a piddling 15%.

    And that doesn’t take into consideration the many tax deductions available to them; W2 income earners pay tax on their entire incomes.

    All we are arguing for is some parity. Let them (and their corporations) pay their share.

     •  Reply
  29. Cheryl 149 3
    Justice22  almost 11 years ago

    “If you were Rich would you voluntarily pay 90% of your income in IRS Taxes?”.What Are you talking about? I said they should pay 90% of the taxes paid if they have 90% of the income. There is a difference there...SORRY I fed the troll but many probably think the same way.

     •  Reply
  30. Bcb9e9d7d78ab1710ebd05f21f05f061
    lectricdude  almost 11 years ago

    …aren’t those “individuals” collectively known as CONGRESS…??…

     •  Reply
  31. Missing large
    frodo1008  almost 11 years ago

    In the constitution of the US, the president (regardless of who he is, or which party he comes from) is NOT in charge of taxes or ultimately in charge of federal spending either. Congress (and even more specifically the Republican controlled House of Representatives) is in charge of the federal budget, NOT the president. And if you think otherwise, and do not realize jut how jealously Congress guards that prerogative, then you really do live in a fantasy land, or at least some other place than the US!!

     •  Reply
  32. Missing large
    frodo1008  almost 11 years ago

    The stock market is currently at an all time high. 401ks and IRAs depend to a very great extent on the level of the stock market. Therefore, it is at least somewhat logical that our current administration is doing very well by those with 401ks and IRAs. So your post is quite incorrect!!

     •  Reply
  33. Missing large
    oneoldhat  almost 11 years ago

    while your statement on taxes and spending is basically true the potus can decide not to enforce the law or spending ie a supporter dies and her girl friend wants to take marital exemption bho decides to go against the law and give 5.6 million break

     •  Reply
  34. Missing large
    Psy  almost 11 years ago

    Tom, your bias view of politics didn’t make sense in Buffalo, and it still doesn’t. Another reason WNY has been brainwashed by this material for being in an economic slump.

     •  Reply
  35. Missing large
    Psy  almost 11 years ago

    “You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich”…A. Lincoln.

     •  Reply
  36. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Well, I’m pretty sure you know why, but I’ll give you my take, if you like.

    They are people who are mostly seniors, living on Social Security, which at even the maximum levels doesn’t cover either the Medicare copays or prescriptions. Prescriptions here cost as much as ten times more (or more) than the same prescription, sold by the same manufacturer in other countries. The cancer drug I’m taking now just came off patent status, so I can get it ‘cheap’, as a generic. ‘Cheap’ would be $400/mo. One of my friends is taking over twenty prescriptions – plus MD recommended supplements. Her income is about $1,200/mo. A few of her prescriptions, all covered by ‘supplemental’ insurance, are over $100/mo. Run some numbers – if you are pretty close to the border, and if you can afford the trip, it’s a trip worth taking.

    Some of them are likely to be seriously underemployed, with no kind of medical coverage whatever; those people can’t even afford to buy basic pain medication here. Many of them are working with badly healed injuries, because they take on jobs they aren’t physically capable of doing, because it’s all they can get, and those kinds of jobs rarely have adequate medical coverage, if any coverage at all.

    I hate to say it, but you might even be seeing disabled vets. We beat our chests about patriotism here, and urgently demand that people ‘support the troops’. However, the government believes in ‘do as I say, not as I do’.

    It costs $4k in this town to set foot over the threshold of the ER. If you are destitute, of course, they eventually write the bill off, after piling on the harrassment for a few years. That’s good support for one’s health, eh? It’s much more, of course, if they actually do anything. MRI runs about $10k, give or take, scheduled or in the ER. but you don’t see that in the ER a lot. Mostly if you go into the ER what you get is really very superficial care; adequate for most things most of the time. That’s the nature of the ER, to a large extent. However, if you can’t show them insurance id, you won’t get that much care. I know of a couple of uninsured people who have nearly died of not having insurance, because everybody knows that those indigent deadbeats are only there to score drugs to sell on the street. In only a very few cases is that a fair judgement.

    Costs for care and treatment do vary from region to region, but there is no place in this country where working people can afford medical care, and in some cases that’s true of people with insurance. If you can’t afford the deductible, you can’t afford to see a doctor – unless you have a few financially peaceful months to save up. Few of the working people in this country ever see that luxury.

    You didn’t really want to know all that, did you?

    :-)

     •  Reply
  37. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    So he did. We need to get it back, and soon.

     •  Reply
  38. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Oh, do give it a rest. It’s certainly not the Liberals who are obsessively determined now not to pay their fair share of taxes.

    Several have stated publicly that for sake of the country, they would support a tax increase on their billions.

    President Obama was one of them, and he’s not actually worth that much.

     •  Reply
  39. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Some people in Canada can afford to come to the US for elective procedures, but from what I hear from Canadians, their medical care is actually much better there than here. .

    Oh, I doubt you could find better medical care than the government gets, but we don’t have that kind of coverage down here at ground level. Down here, it has become frightening. Paperwork is a joke; they never fail to ask you your birthdate, but they do that because there have been so many id screwups that the situation actually went public. I have yet to run into a doctor who reads charts beyond a quick pass to see what your current meds are. 90% of treatment comes in the form of prescriptions, appropriate or not. One of my doctors (yes, I fired him) tried for eighteen months to get me to take Prozac, in spite of the fact that I wasn’t depressed. He finally told me that he had ‘lots of patients doing very well on Prozac, who aren’t depressed’. Good thing I had to learn young to say ‘no’ to doctors, because it turned out that I have a sleep disorder. Had I taken the Prozac, I’d probably be dead of heart failure or stroke long since.

    Dr. Canuck will correct me if I’m wrong about the Canadian medical system.

     •  Reply
  40. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    We aren’t supposed to point out that tax loopholes materially reduce their tax burden, a privilege not available to W2 workers.

    We also aren’t supposed to ask what rates they are paying on the interest on their offshore accounts.

    And under NO circumstances are we to even think of, much less mention aloud, the piddling capital gains tax they pay on unearned income.

    Someone might be offended if we did those things.

     •  Reply
  41. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Thank you for saying that. It describes the situation perfectly, and in a nutshell too!

     •  Reply
  42. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    I thought it was a thinly disguised edition of Romney’s plan in Massachusetts … no ..?

     •  Reply
  43. Topzdrum 1w
    Hawthorne  almost 11 years ago

    Agreed. Clearly right of center. Still a little left of the neocons, though :-)

     •  Reply
  44. Madmen icon
    McSpook  almost 11 years ago

    “He is talking about individuals who do not work at all, they receive Welfare Checks, pay zero taxes and get a $5,000.00 refund.”

    If these people get any kind of refund, it’s because they paid payroll taxes.You don’t get a refund if you paid NO taxes, lame brain.And do you actually know ANYONE who do not work and got a $5,000 tax refund?I thought not.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Tom Toles