Obama is not Raising Taxes on Anyone Making Less than $250,000 Right?

1. 68

   MikeNVposted 14 years ago

   When these Tax "Breaks" expire... you know the ones put into place by that Evil Bastard Bush...
   
   Will they not effect those under $250,000?  Of course Obama can just say he didn't raise them... he just let the existing "Breaks" Expire.  This is the same as telling a man dying of thirst in the Desert he didn't kill him... as he dumps out a glass of water in front of him.
   
   The following are some of the tax increases that are scheduled to go into effect in 2011....
   
   1 - The lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 10 percent to 15 percent.
   
   2 - The next lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 25 percent to 28 percent.
   
   3 - The 28 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 31 percent.
   
   4 - The 33 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 36 percent.
   
   5 - The 35 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 39.6 percent.
   
   6 - In 2011, the death tax is scheduled to return.  So instead of paying zero percent, estates of $1 million or more are going to be taxed at a rate of 55 percent.
   
   7 - The capital gains tax is going to increase from 15 percent to 20 percent.
   
   8 - The tax on dividends is going to increase from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.
   
   9 - The "marriage penalty" is also scheduled to be reinstated in 2011.
   
   It is being estimated that the total cost of these tax increases to U.S. taxpayers will be $2.6 trillion through the year 2020.
   
   But someone has got to pay for the Billions Given away to Wall Street, and Industrial War Complex right?

   replyreport
   1. 73

      IntimatEvolutionposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You bring up some really great points at the end of your thread.  Yes, all that money needs to be paid back to China, somehow or another.  I think we are in for a long haul, no matter who is or is not running this country.  We just cannot continue to live off of borrowed time.  It does catch up to us one way or another.  I guess our free for all ends in 2011.

      replyreport
      1. 70

         ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Well the government can always repudiate the debt.  It's been done often enough to the US. Something slimy about taking that way out though.  If we still have the same crop of scum in office when things get bad enough, I'm sure they won't have the stones to live up to our obligations and repudiate the debt.

         replyreport
2. 59

   TMMasonposted 14 years ago

   It may seem dumb to us, Mike... but it will sure fool the hell out of the Leant Leftists.
   
   And of course it will all be Bush's fault.

   replyreport
3. 0

   ryankettposted 14 years ago

   "Obama and Democratic lawmakers want to extend only those tax cuts that benefit families making less than $250,000 a year."
   
   Source: Washington Post
   
   What do you want anyway? Do you want him to cut the national debt deficit or continue overspending? You can't have it both ways. Its one way or the other way.

   replyreport
4. 74

   Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

   How else do you propose the government reduce the multi-trillion dollar deficit?

   replyreport
   1. 68

      MikeNVposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Here is an idea... actually many ideas.
      
      Quit spending money they don't have.
      Quit taxing to death the small businessman so he can create jobs and put people to work which increases revenues.
      Quit throwing weekly parties at the white house
      Quit funding the Afghan War
      Quit giving money away to Pakistan and Israel.
      
      Those are just some places to start.
      
      But if you are an idiot and don't mind giving your money away then go ahead and continue to support Odumbo.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         jaymelee23posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, no kidding. People are losing their homes and living off of unemployment ect. and they just gave like 10 million dollars to Pakistan for the flooding. I understand that people need help but we really aren't in the best situation right now to do so. Charity begins at home first and then when things get better... we can help other countries. The people here should be the first priority.

         replyreport
      2. 58

         rlaframboiseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         i am right with you brother, summed up by obey the Constitution.

         replyreport
   2. 70

      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Stop spending our money to pay off unions would be a great start.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Or, starting stupid wars to benefit officeholder's companies. (Haliburton)  How much did the Iraq war cost, or is still costing us?

         replyreport
         1. 70

            ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            That's just stupid.  Lots of companies benefited, not just Halliburton.  Perhaps you've heard of a little thing called the Congressional-Military-Industrial Complex?  Been around for quite a while.  It was responsible for the stupid way we fought the Cold War.  You might want to read up on it, this bad stuff goes back more than just 8 years.
            
            Freaking Lefties.  No sense of history whatsoever.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Who said this was the only only stupid war?  I only mentioned the most recent.  Freaking non-voters!  Plenty to say, just not doing anything about it!

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  No sense in voting when your only choices are Obama and Obama-lite....sorry McCain.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     No sense in criticizing those who do vote when you do nothing but speculate.  What have you done to make a difference other than complain about those that at least try?  Don't vote, don't vent! 
                     
                     
                     Oh yeah, as long as you do not make a choice you feel free to criticize those who do.  Cop out, pure and simple.  Why should anyone take anything you say seriously if you just sit on the fence along with the other nay-sayers?  Not saying anyone does, of course!  LOL!

                     replyreport
   3. 59

      Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      By not spending.

      replyreport
5. 88

   Pamela99posted 14 years ago

   How about cutting the pork that is in every bill that is passed by congress?  Stimulus money in huge amount given to universities to study things like dance so a choreographer can plan a routine without all the dance troupe.  That was give to a college in NC.  Money could be spend to rebuild old bridges, roads, dams and industry in general so there would  be more jobs.  People are desperate for jobs.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      jaymelee23posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I didn't even see your post. I just posted something below about this lol You are 100 percent correct, Pamela! Did you see the stimulus given to create "4" jobs? It was to take pictures of bugs. I think it cost about $340,000 for that stimulus.

      replyreport
6. 61

   Doug Hughesposted 14 years ago

   As always, Mike pays little attention to 'truth in reporting'. He lists how the taxes will change when the Bush Tax cuts expire. Everything he cites is 'true' in that it's what's in the law that was passed 10 years ago.
   
   What Mike neglected to mention is that the White House wants to extend the tax cuts for those making less than 250K per year. The lion's share of the tax cuts went to the richest Americans. They can afford to go back to paying the tax rates that were in effect when we had a budget surplus.
   
   Note that capital gains goes from 15% to 20% but the tax rate for the richest 'working' Americans will be at 39.6. SO a top surgeon pays at 36.9 for saving lives, but the wealthy elite who don't work and live off paper investments - pay only 20%.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Never mind the fact that the only way to grown an economy is through investment.  The richest 20% have the most money to invest.  You sure as heck can't grow an economy through government spending, all you can do is waste that capital.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         From Paul Krugman - Nobel Prize Economist
         
         "There’s now a lot of talk about the fact that U.S. corporations are sitting on a lot of cash, but not spending it. I don’t find that particularly puzzling: with huge excess capacity, why invest in building even more capacity. But almost everyone seems to agree that if we could somehow get businesses to spend some of that cash, it would create jobs.
         
         Which then raises the question: how can you believe that, and not also believe that if the U.S. government were to borrow some of the cash corporations aren’t spending, and spend it on, say, public works, this would also create jobs?"

         replyreport
         1. 58

            rlaframboiseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            HAHA! Spend some of the cash they aren't spending.... so you suppose we can create a tax that only taxes the corporations not spending money? What about the corporations that are struggling? Oh, they won't mind the loss of their operating capital. As usual, you live in fantasy land, how is the weather in Pandora?

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Paul Krugman never proposed a tax - and neither did I.
               
               Reading for comprehension is a skill - keep trying. If you want to  practice on the blog by Krugman,
               
               http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0 … -stimulus/

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  One thing that idiot never seems to ask is why are companies sitting on that cash.  They sure as heck aren't making money by sitting on it.  Since they are not growing their business, what are they doing with all that cash?  Hoarding it.  Why?  Because of that abortion of a healthcare reform bill and so-called financial reform bill. 
                  
                  To put it in words even you can understand Doug, companies are afraid to expand because they can't yet see the consequences of those laws.  If they make a guess and expand and then it turns out they guessed wrong, well they go out of business.  At least if they have hoarded cash on hand, they can use that to offset the losses Obamacare and Collectivization...um financial reform is going to incur.
                  
                  So it's not that they're not using the money, they're being prudent and saving it for a rainy day.  I know that's something foreign to a Keynesian economist, which is why I think the Nobel Prize committee needs to ask for their award back.

                  replyreport
         2. 70

            ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Figures you'd quote that idiot Krugman.  Were you aware he was calling for a housing bubble in 2003, I think it was?
            
            http://mises.org/daily/3691
            
            
            
            http://mises.org/daily/4350
            
            Apparently Krugman doesn't read history:
            
            
            
            

            replyreport
7. 66

   jaymelee23posted 14 years ago

   Did you guys see all the excessive spending on the stimulus and bailouts on ABC World News? Ridiculous... what about the local schools, colleges and universities that are constantly remodeling or building fancy suites? The college that I went to just build one of those huge domes and fancy suites for students. Over the time period that I was there, they were constantly tore up and remodeling buildings. One of the food courts was also stripped down. The place was actually very nice and was far from needing a "remodeling." Of course they will raise the tuition and "dorm" rental rates. Who do you think gives them the money to do this? Tax payers do. The county where I live in just dumped a few million dollars into an old railroad grade to make half of it a hiking and biking trail...the other half is for the Amish. Cut me a break! We already have a 10 mile bike trail. The federal and state governments give them grants and if they don't use it then they lose it. It's frivolous and wasteful spending that goes on that is making the economy worse. All of these projects should be throughly examined before grants or funds are allowed to be used. It should serve a purpose and a need. I don't think our country government workers and reps know what it mean to spend wisely. They should have to give these funds and grants back if they serve no real need or purpose. I could go on and on but the above posters have covered the Gov. employee fringe benefits and all of the other important issues.

   replyreport