Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
82% of Obama Voters Will Vote To Reelect Him If He Raises Taxes On The Rich
A new survey of Obama voters by Survey USA found that by a margin of 82%-18% they are more likely to support him again in 2012 if he raises taxes on the rich.
The good news for Obama is that 66% of those who voted for him in 2008 approve of his handling of the economy compared to 27% who disapprove. Sixty three percent of those who disapprove are doing so because they believe that Obama has been too willing to compromise with Republicans. The president’s voters made it very clear what they want. Eighty one percent of those who voted for Obama said that they want to see the president lay out a broad jobs plan next week. Only 16% wanted him to focus on smaller measures.
What Obama voters don’t want is any kind of deal that would cut government programs in exchange for GOP support of his jobs plan. Forty one percent of respondents said that they would be less likely support his reelection campaign if Obama cuts government programs, and 21% said that they would be more likely to support him in 2012. Thirty two percent said that it made no difference in their support if the president cut government programs. Over 2/3 of Obama voters (67%) said that they would be less likely to support him in 2012 if he cuts Social Security or Medicare.
It is clear what Obama voters want. They want entitlements left alone, and they want a big jobs plan that doesn’t compromise with the GOP. It looks like his voters are willing to stick by him as long as he goes big, and leaves entitlements out of the discussion.
Barring a big jobs plan, there is one more thing that Obama can do to keep his 2008 supporters solidly in his camp.
President Obama can raise taxes on the rich. By a whopping margin of 82%-5%, Obama voters said that they would be more likely to support the president in 2012 if he raised taxes on the rich and closed the corporate loopholes. This support was across the board. 82% of men and 81% of women said that taxing the rich would make them more likely to support the president in 2012. By age, 84% of those 35-49, 85% of those 50-64, and 87% of seniors said that that taxing the rich would boost their support for Obama. (The percentage of support for tax increases on the wealthy seems to grow with age, because many of these people know that raising revenue works. They have seen it work before).
Support for taxing the rich is higher among those who are more likely to actually have resources. Eighty six percent of Obama supporters who are over age 50 are more likely to support the president if he raises taxes on the rich compared to 79% of those under 50. White Obama supporters (86%) are more likely to favor taxing the rich than Hispanics (78%), Blacks (76%), and Asians (71%). The more conservative the Obama voter, the more likely they are to attach supporting Obama in 2012 to taxing the rich. Eighty seven percent of Obama voters who consider themselves very conservative favor increasing taxes on the wealthy, as do 86% of conservative Obama voters. Eighty four percent of liberals would be more likely to support Obama if he increased taxes on the rich, as would 78% of moderates.
Increasing taxes on the wealthy is an issue that is a big winner for President Obama, and the best thing that he could do to boost the morale of those who voted for him in 2008 is to make getting the rich to pay their fair share his battle cry for 2012. Washington is so trapped in an inertia of non-governing that Obama has absolutely nothing to lose by going big on this jobs plan. Republicans are going to block it anyway, so the president should make his plan, and the inevitable Republicans obstruction of it, a major message of his 2012 campaign.
The issue of increasing taxes on the wealthy is an easy winner for Obama. No matter who the Republican nominee is, they are going to publicly oppose increasing taxes on the wealthy. If Obama makes the fair share argument the center of his 2012 campaign, his voters will come out in droves, and Independents will again support this president.
If Obama makes the Republican nominee’s campaign about defending the rich while the rest of us suffer, he will win reelection. The GOP’s screams of class warfare will be muted by an agenda that seeks to kill Medicare to save the tax cuts for the rich. In other words, it is tough to accuse the other side of class warfare when you are practicing it yourself.
President Obama’s supporters are yearning for him to take the fight to the GOP on increasing taxes on the wealthy, and I have a hunch that is exactly what they are going to get from President Obama between now and November 2012.
Image: Godless Liberal Homo
Related Posts :
A new CNN poll released today found that 67% of all Americans and 69% of Independents side with Democrat ...
President Obama sent the message today through Robert Gibbs on CNN that he plans to kill the Bush tax cu ...
A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll has found that 63% of Americans support the American Jobs Act, a ...
A new Quinnipiac poll released today found that 67% of those surveyed felt that any deal to raise the de ...
President Obama has so convincingly won the message war on taxes that according to new Bloomberg poll, n ...
130 Responses to 82% of Obama Voters Will Vote To Reelect Him If He Raises Taxes On The Rich
Public Service Advertisements
Nobody Special
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Let’s hope so. The President could come out and say that he is a gay, paint huffing pink elephant that wears tutus and I would still vote for him, consider the alternative.
yobaba
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 8:40 pm
Me, too. Thank you for stating the obvious. BTW, You and I must have been separated at birth.
kewlethan
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Me too!
sherriww
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 10:41 pm
Count me in on that too-The voting FOR Pres.Obama,NO MATTER WHAT! However,I will tell you what does have me upset! It seems to me that the American voters are acting way more uneducated,and uninformed,than can surely be the fact! Except for the richest people in this country,ANYONE ELSE,who would vote for ANY REPUBLICAN,tell me-What on Earth is WRONG with those voters?? Every single one of the Repub and Teaparty people in office have ALREADY SAID THEY WONT HELP THE MIDDLE CLASS&POOR! THEY ALL WANT TO DISMANTLE SOCIAL SECURITY,MEDICARE AND MEDICAID-programs we ALL PAY FOR,ALL OUR LIVES! They are NOT FREE,YOU EARN THE RIGHT TO THEM,FROM YOUR FIRST DAY ON A JOB,AS A TEENAGER!The idea that,while seeing what these Repub/TeaP have ALREADY DONE,IN WISCONSIN,OHIO,MICHIGAN,FLORIDA,KANSAS,JUST TO NAME A FEW,AND YET ANYONE WITH A HALFWAY THINKING MIND,WOULD VOTE TO PUT ONE OF THESE IDIOTS IN THE WHITEHOUSE!!? So,then they can Completely take away all we have worked for,leaving people with no SS pension or Medicare,when they can no longer work-OUR MONEY,and they will take it!Then,to top it off,Repubs dont want us to have any HEALTH CARE EITHER,OR ANY WOMENS RIGHTS.Why would anybody but the top 10% in the country,vote to put these people in office,KNOWING they will take away your rights and your money!?Its nuts,and I dont get it.It isnt likely to hurt me near as much as a lot of other folks,but I DO NOT WANT THESE TEAPUBLICANS TO GET AWAY WITH THIS! Pres.Obama may have faults,as we all do,but he will Never intentionally hurt us,or take away our Soc.Sec.,medical care,schooling for our children,or hate us because we are not rich! If people vote a Repub into office,then the voters will truly get the NONgovernment they deserve! Somebody like that fake,Rick Perry,who couldnt speak the truth if it bit him+yeah,he would make government”unimportant”in our lives,so that just like Eric Cantor,when you have a mess and NEED govt.help,they WONT BE THERE!good idea-my lord,have folks lost their minds,to even CONSIDER any GOP nuts right now!?
Moongal6
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 11:36 pm
I appreciate your passion in your comments. It is imperative that we make sure that the facts and the truth are put forth to ANYONE we speak with politically. There is plenty of ignorance going on in all corners of the political scene.
If we do not address this ignorance, we do so at our own peril.
The low income voter will be the death knell for America.
Moongal6
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 11:37 pm
Oooops. It’s late, I meant to say ‘the low information voter’, will be the death knell for America.
I am the low income voter!
Adam
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:01 am
There is a certain segment of society that believes the government shouldn’t be involved in our lives to the extent that they are, or appear to want to be. You have the right idea when you talk about the government taking OUR money. You don’t want them to do things with it you don’t support. Why would you not extend that same courtesy to me, and allow me to say I don’t want the government spending my tax dollars on social programs? I’m touched by your faith in Obama, but his broken promises stand tall as you berate Perry for dishonesty. “Why is Gitmo still open?” would be a question asked to illustrate the point.
Why are you scared of non-government? That is the best form of government for America, one which sticks to the principles of the constitution and is downsized. There is not a social program the government runs which isn’t duplicated more efficiently by a non-profit organization. You wouldn’t spend 4x the money on a product when you can get the exact same product cheaper, right? So why ask me to approve spending my tax dollars in a horribly inefficient way.
And I’m middle class. Not rich. Not poor. I’m just one of those INSANE people who tends to think for themselves, stays relatively calm and objective about policy, and chuckles when a complete over-use of CAPS-LOCK is used in a comment.
jpm
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:02 am
well mr. insane when you or your family members get hit by a natural disaster or other situation and you need assistance I’ll remember your arrogance.
cracks me up that republicans love using the pull yourself up by the bootstraps crap until a major corporation like the airlines, banks or savings and loans need corporate welfare and hand outs from taxpayers.
Republicans want less government SUPPORT for the people and MORE for big business. I sure would love a bail out sometimes.
JPM
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 9:30 am
Thank you for illustrating how little you actually now of the opposing side, JPM.
Most republicans think the bailouts was a bad idea, and openly criticize the government.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 9:43 am
Most republicans dont care what would have happened without the bailouts too. Nor do they think about it
Tina
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:17 am
Well Adam,since you weren’t paying attention,President Obama signed an executive order to close Gitmo,and not only did the R’s resist,but the Blue Dogs of his own party resisted.They voted NOT to fund the closing of Gitmo and would not let them put them on trial in the US.So what was he supposed to do? As with EVERYTHING this President wants to do,he has opposition from both parties.
Yes there are some things that I find disappointing about this President but I do know how government works.And unfortunately,this government doesn’t work and refuses to work WITH our President.But he gets my vote because the alternative is too frightening to even imagine.
As far as social programs,sure there is fraud,but these programs is what helped make a middle class in this country.Only when YOU need that help,will you appreciate them being in place.And only when we end corporate welfare will I even look at changing these programs.
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:28 am
You’re certainly insane but whether you have actually “thought” is a different matter. Your diatribe is less thought and more a collection of class-based grievances.
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:05 pm
I had the opportunity to work for both private and public zoos. Both of them do things incorrectly, just like publicly or privately funded charities or programs. However, the thing they do have in common is that they want to hire as few employees as possible to keep their budgets concentrated on the upper levels. Corporations maximize profits by outsourcing jobs or eliminating hours and benefits; government offices give more work to fewer employees to keep the inflated paychecks that the right-wing says all public employees make. But because private companies aren’t that transparent, upper management can make up to 300 times the paycheck of the line worker.
In zoos, the difference is only about 4 or 5 times, luckily or not: animals have to eat, and unless you have the backing of a Disney or Busch, most zoos don’t always operate in the black. To save money, there are hiring freezes, which means the keepers are overworked, because they still have to feed, clean, shift the animals on/off exhibit, train, assist in vet procedures, maintain exhibits, fix plumbing/electricity/etc, be ready for emergencies, educate the public, prevent the public from trespassing or getting killed, attend meetings for policy & procedures, operate landscaping equipment (mowers, blowers, weed-whackers, bobcats, backhoes), write reports, and if they have time after all that: make sure the animals are happy and health. Everyday.
I mention all that because private zoos often pay less, public zoos pay a little more, but neither is more efficient than the other. Saying a privately owned zoo is automatically better by virtue of its corporate status is lazy, and dangerous to everyone. Corporations treat everything as a product to be discarded if it cuts into the profit margin- especially employees. The private zoo I used to work at switched from public status shortly before I started working there. The employees who used to work for the city got to keep their paychecks, which was more than double what mine was. With private ownership came a theme-park mentality, except zoo animals aren’t that kind of an attraction. The history of zoos may have started that way, but nowadays the primary purpose of any legitimate zoo is to educate the public about the environment, not advertise commercial sponsors or movies. Yet the public system is wrapped up in red tape, so their are forms and chains of command that can delay things that need to be done immediately.
I have another example of how private isn’t better than public: Insurance. I was injured on the job, so I deal with Worker’s Comp and their subcontracted private health insurer. An attorney and regular mediations are needed because I am routinely denied medical treatment. I’ve had prescriptions denied or altered because some cubicle drone who doesn’t have any medical background thinks the doctor doesn’t know what he’s doing. By law, I am supposed to receive whatever care is prescribed, but both agencies do what they can to avoid paying any money: bonuses and profit. In fact, their policies are designed to get the patient to accept the smallest possible settlement, or even better- drop out entirely.
No system or organization is immune from the Peter Principle. Point of fact, the Peter Principle worsens when there are more levels in the hierarchy because the managers are removed from the realities of the actual work being done, which results in a sense that they aren’t responsible for their employees. Yet the employees are the ones who lose their jobs when someone upstairs screws up, or gets some sort of promotion/severance bonus which eats into the budget for the entire organization.
You say no government is better than any at all. I’d ask you to consider that when you realize someone living on a fry cook’s wages is teaching your children, or there are no doctors in the operating room- only nurses- because they have been outsourced to another country where they operate by telepresence.
Twobears
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 5:12 pm
Adam you want less government ? there are many Countries that would support that, Move to one of them, and stop trying to make the rest of us live by your standards, they suck !!! We like our Government just as it is, compassionate and effective
Ed
Sep. 10th, 2011 at 9:33 pm
Move to a country that supports less govt?! Wow….guess you have never taken a history class. Any clue as to what this country was founded in? We have moved to the left in a way that would make the Founding Fathers sick to their stomachs. YOU move to another country where your better understood….somewhere in Europe might work well for you…..enjoy.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 10th, 2011 at 10:02 pm
LOL whats wrong with that? You have the same rights in Europe that you have here, better healthcare, faster trains and less crime.
Thanks!
Xango
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:00 am
Ever see any of those psychobilly movies? You know the ones where deranged, psychotic hillbilly types attack and maurad travelling college students and people from urban areas that happen to be traversing through their ranch towns? Those psychobillies are the ones that vote for the T-party. And America, unfortunately, is full of these people. Ignorant, uneducated, easily manipulated, racist, fundamentalist christian hicks. (See Devil’s Rejects as an example.)
Put that together with the BILLIONS of dollars supplied by the uber-fascist Koch brothers propaganda machine and you have a few gazillionaires buying off American democracy.
America is under grave threat and it’s not from moderate conservative Obama’s supposed “socialism”.
America is under threat by BILLIONAIRES and GIGANTIC tax-dodging, environment destroying corporations who are manipulating the political system through a severely compromised Congress who has sold it’s soul to lobbying bribes. Add to that toxic mix an out-of-control Republican party intent on destroying democracy in this country by rigged elections and manipulation of the media and Obama will be lucky to be anywhere near re-election next year.
rusty57
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:40 pm
“uneducated,and uninformed”
Sums up your post nicely.
Xango
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Sorry to hear that you belong to that class. Perhaps you should consider attending a Community College and taking courses in Political Science so you could understand how you are being bamboozled by this political system.
Beaureguard
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Sherri your right about the electorate. Some of the most important information in our history has been suppressed by the News Media, or not reported at all. In 1933 the wealthy wanted a Fascist government to mirror Italy and Germany. British and American Banks, Wall Street and the wealthy families supported Fascism. They had a coup and establishd Hitler as German Chancellor. The coup stopped Von Schleicher and his economic development program to stop the Fascist control over their political and financial power.
Their next move was to assassinate Franklin D. Roosevelt before he was inaugurated as president. The unsuccessful attempt claimed the life of Chicago Mayor Anton Cemak who died three weeks later from his wounds. If sucessful Herbert Hoover would have remained as president,he supported the Fascist movement.
Next was the plan for a coup against FDR. The mistake they made was trying to get Marine General Smedley to lead the coup. Thank God he told Congress and the coup was stopped. No history book told the story and no one was brought to justice because the supporters were the rich and famous families. Our government bought and paid for, just as it is again today. A coup by the Fascist that do control our country and want our president brouhgt down even at the peril of our nation. Our Democracy is LOST.
America please wake up from the lip service and talking points of the Republicans and Tea Party rhetoric. Call it like it is Fascism.
Jakal
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 9:33 am
Your lack of government and economical knowledge is baffling, to say the least. Where do I even begin. A less active government is a financial release for ALL! Taxing the rich? The voters who believe this are also Obama voters who believe that 150K per year is rich. Have you checked a families cost of college for 2 children lately. Those people don’t receive gov’t assistance. If you are talking about the super rich then take this little economical lesson. Tax the owner of Target for instance and he will close stores and increase prices. BTW most people who are employed by and shop at such stores are the largest percentage Obama voters. The owner of Target isn’t going to just pay 20mil more in taxes and say “Oh well” He hasn’t lied to you? Why don’t you go back and check all of the promises he stated in his last election and see what has been accomplished. Being articulate does not equal intelligence. Any individual who did not know that we receive an abundance of oil from S. America should not have been a president in the 1st place. Oh and 1 of his cuts to make up for the trillion$ debt increase was to education. For just these reasons alone I cannot respect an individual who did and would vote for Obama again. How’s about a simple step like decreasing the energy taxes that Clinton implied that has driven a large amount of business and jobs over seas, and is why I speak to India every time I call for customer service. Why don’t you go check why Obama was really in Afghanistan and see how many more corporations have populated the “mountains” When you really understand politics then return here and make ignorant comments like saying “If people vote a Repub into office…,to even CONSIDER any GOP nuts right now!?” You probably have no understanding as to why you are paying more for oil these days and actually think that it’s due to unrest in the Middle East, as he would have you believe. become more knowledgeable of politics and economics and maybe then you’ll be a republican, remain ignorant and we will be placed in this irreconcilable state for another 4 years. I am not “RICH” in any sense of the word, but I do not enjoy someone lying through their teeth and feeding me “extraordinary” speeches (sarcasm), which logically cannot be obtained, is not who I want as a president. A major problem this country has is hearing the truth and that’s why we ended up with an idiot as a president. Government was created for protection, financial stability and the bettering of ones self through education. All aspects have been downgraded since his term.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 9:39 am
Target is a public corporation, not owned by one person. It is 5.3% french owned though
Obama has completed 85% of his promises.
You speak to India because the corporations you so lovingly coddle want cheap wages. The taxes overseas are as high as they are here.
Fail.
Poor Assnicka
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:49 am
You dumb sheep. If you earn a paycheck, you are considered “rich” to these politicians. Way to give freedom away. You’re so righteous (sarcasm).
Xango
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Wrong. The politicians themselves are the super rich. Just about EVERY SINGLE SENATOR is a millionaire. It’s the millionaires club. And guess what they do? They take care of their own. They take care of the BILLIONAIRES while shafting the working people. If you earn a paycheck you’re considered “rich” by the IRS. That is of course, unless you earn hundreds of thousands, millions or billions a year in which case you are given a pass and allowed to store your billions in earnings in offshore accounts. Ask Dick Cheney and Halliburton about that one!
Kevin Schmidt
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:21 pm
What alternative? If you haven’t noticed, DINO Obama’s policies are further to the right than Dubya’s.
Obama threw the Progressive Democrats under the bus. Then he threw his supporters under the bus.
But you memory challenged voters want to vote for getting thrown under the bus again.
That’s madness.
We need to primary Obama’s ass and vote him O-U-T! That is the only rational and sane solution.
Xango
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I wish it were that easy. Quite frankly, as a progressive, I think that Obama has been a miserable failure. He had massive opportunities and squandered them. It’s not surprising when you think of his connections to Harvard U. That university has produced nothing but despots here and around the world. People who believe that as the elite, they are “entitled” to rule. And who have a very classist view of the world. We need a president that went to a State University. Not an Ivy League elitist.
However, given our current political system, think of the alternatives. President McCain and Vic President Palin? I’ll take Obama over those clowns any day of the week. I’m not willing to take the SUICIDAL option in my oppostion to Obama. The primary system is rigged to favor the incumbent. I’d love to see a true liberal challenge Obama but alas, it will never come to pass. The Democratic party (as will the Republican party) will always favor an incumbent for re-election. The other problem is this. In 2012, when faced by an opponent like Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, Mitt Romney… What will you do? I will hold my nose and vote for Obama. And hope that some day we will get a genuine liberal in the white house.
I wish someone like Cornell West or Tavis Smiley or Barbara Lee would run for president. Those are some people I could back whole-heartedly.
Eric
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 5:11 pm
I’ll vote for Obama again if he changes unemployment to the way it used to be, where people had to go wait in line for their checks, prove that they are actively job-hunting, and face the humility of it all, rather than sitting at home and collecting checks. I personally know too many people who are happily cashing their unemployment checks, going on VACATIONS and not looking for work, while I am at work 45-50 hours a week making less than they get for free. The 99 weeks “limit” is a joke, and I’m glad it’s not getting re-extended. “Wait, you mean I can not work for two years, I don’t have to prove that I’m looking for a job, and I can collect unemployment, meaning I’ll likely make more than I was before because not having to go to work cuts down on my expenses?” More taxes on the rich? Maybe that would work. But how about a flat tax rate with less exemptions and loopholes for everyone over the poverty line? Let’s try that out.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 5:20 pm
were I you I would be happy I have a job. Right now there are six people unemployed for every job that is open. You are making the assumption that people could just run out and grab a job which is incredibly far from the facts. Why do you think the people in this country are yelling for jobs? or had that occurred to you? You might also consider that many companies are not hiring people unless they are already employed. Did you think of that? Did you also stop to think that a tremendous amount of companies are hiring only through employment agencies? And then I’ll a person would have to do to prove he is looking for a job is sign up with couple of them?
If you are making less money than people who get unemployment for all those hours you claim your working you are most certainly in the wrong business or lying through your teeth.
The max unemployment in NY is $415.00. If you are not making that much in 50 hours, I advise you quit. but I think you ought to know something, you have to be laid off for lack of work before you can collect unemployment. There are no other reasons under which you are eligible
Lawrence Chow
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 10:42 pm
So lets break this down. Eric was simply stating that some people just have no motivation to work and simply “sit on the couch” collecting unemployment checks, which are now way to easy to come by. As a sidenote I completely agree that people aggresively searching for jobs with little or no avail should be entitled to these funds. To be honest I am a college student who is on financial aid and grew up in a town with horrible school systems but never once did i think i was entitled to what rich people have through taxes. We have to stop worrying about what others have and focus on ourselves, maybe if we all just paid attention in school and graduate high school or graduate college we wouldnt have to complain about unemployment. I understand that defunct companies lay people off and it doesnt matter how good or bad of a worker you are, but investing in our own human capital is how we will get jobs and feed our families. The current tex rate on the rich is already extensive and “piggybacking” off the rich isnt going to get us jobs in the long run.
Sarah Jones
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 11:08 pm
Lawrence, I commend you for your efforts re your education, but I suspect they haven’t gotten to government yet because tax rates for the rich are at the lowest point now — lower than under Reagan, which sort of puts the old wet blanket on the rest of your argument. It sounds good, until you realize that it’s just a story, not the truth.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 11:22 pm
1. Taxing the rich is not intended to create jobs. It is intended to provide revenue that the GOP has taken away
2. You have to pass pretty strict rules to get unemployment. You have to be laid off for lack of work and hardly any other excuse will get you that unemployment. Its not all too easy to “get”
3. The taking taxes away from the top wealthy people means that the lower and middle class have to make that up. In other words when you get out of school on your financial aid, you will be paying the taxes that the very wealthy do not pay.
4. everyone says they had a horrible school system but very probably didnt. You learned enough to get you into college didnt you?
5. There is a segment of people that have quit looking because they have been off more than 2 years. Thats undeniable. But it is a very small segment and anything Eric said about the unemployed was mostly BS.
6. People only get unemployment for a certain length of time. We have people in this country who were laid off in 2007 who still are not working.
7. As stated. There is at least a 6:1 ration of people for every job opening. Companys now hire from employment agencys almost exclusively. Many companys will only hire people switching between jobs, not the unemployed.
8 I strongly suggest you get off the talking points and look into reality. To allow the very wealthy to not pay taxes or at least close the loopholes is Irresponsible.
Nate
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:48 am
3. The taking taxes away from the top wealthy people means that the lower and middle class have to make that up. In other words when you get out of school on your financial aid, you will be paying the taxes that the very wealthy do not pay.
Only if government keeps spending as though they still had that money. Which they do.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 9:41 am
Wrong. No matter what, any break for the wealthy is paid for by the lower and middle class. Under normal employment numbers there is no spending problem. Today there is more of a revenue problem than a spending problem.
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:48 am
It wasn’t a question of “some”- Eric meant “all”. His qualifier of “knowing too many” people cashing in their checks to take vacation is a distraction. The only way that that’s possible is if that person has money saved up and takes a trip to get away from the shame of getting fired or laid off. Otherwise the people taking vacations with UEC need to have a spouse or parents whose income is generous enough to consider a 60% cut to your paycheck the same as disposable income. That inspires the knee-jerk reaction in me to think the job was only for a discount or pin money; which isn’t any better than calling poor people stray animals we need to stop feeding.
Strumiker
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:26 am
Unemployment is not easily obtainable. Back a few years, I was working at Sears full time in Green Bay. My hours kept getting cut for no apparent reason. Soon, I was at part-time… and then I was at zero. Every time I checked the schedule I wasn’t on it, but I was never fired and when I asked, they would not give me an answer. So, I filed for unemployment because I couldn’t immediately find a job and I had to pay bills to live in a house, to feed myself, in order to not be on the streets begging for money.
At first, I was receiving some unemployment – not much, but enough to push back the bills and whatnot. About 4 months later, I was able to get a job. The following year when I did my taxes… I had to pay it all back. Every penny. Sears apparently denied what they did.
So in my mind, I did not receive unemployment. Had Sears jump on this right away, I wouldn’t have been able to get any help to support me finding another job. I don’t claim to know how the system work, this was just my experience.
Pappy
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:34 pm
There are always jobs. The problem is finding a job that you want or that will provide for a level at which a person expects to live. When I was in my twenty’s the small city I lived in went through a natural disaster. Unemployment was in the 20% and higher range. Everyone was complaining that there was no work to be found. Yes, there were lines for people for the “good” jobs and only the very qualified or connected got those jobs.
I was out of work. I went from making 60k a year to nothing. I saw a few options: pull my kids out of school and the city they lived in their entire life, take the government assistance and wait for another 60k a year job or “pull myself up by the bootstraps” and survive. I still had my health and I knew I could do many jobs that many would have thought was beneath them. I accepted jobs that Mike Rowe would find disgusting.. I was able to do entry level minimum wage jobs and even work door to door performing side jobs for extra money. I washed windows, pulled weeds, painted, cleaned, etc..
We canceled our cable and all luxuries. We ate simply and seldom entertained. We bought second hand clothes from good will and was never to proud to accept hand me downs. I could not afford my house on my lowered income so I sold my house and lived in a less expensive apartment. I sold one car and bought a cheap motorcycle. After a year of struggling The city began to recover as did I.
In that year I saw friends and people around me complain that there were no jobs and yet when I would call and say, “Hey I need some help painting fences that will earn you $250 for a weeks work. I was told no, I don’t want to work outside in the heat. Or I don’t know how to paint.” I didn’t know how to do many of the jobs that I did accepted back then, but I asked those that did or I went to library and read books. In fact, that became our entertainment. My wife and I would take the kids to the library and she would help them pick out books to read while I researched plumbing electrical, computer repair and anything else I could do.
There were two or three of my friends that did similar work during that time. One went as far as saving enough for a bus ticket and a couple of months in a cheap apartment and moved to a larger city where work was easier to come by.
I learned a lot about myself and those around me over that year. More importantly I hope I was a good example to my children and wife.
I am just so tired of seeing people complain about the lack of jobs and unemployment while they are driving their SUVs talking on their IPhones and watching their $200 a month cable for 6 hours a night and I am sure there are cities out there where jobs are more difficult. If your city is that bad, move. Nothing in our constitution guarantees me a big house and a fancy car and we should not have to convince people to get off of unemployment. Unemployment should come with a few stipulations.
I agree with Lawrence, people looking for jobs that cannot find them should have access to funds. But what type of jobs are they looking for? I suspect they are not looking that hard or they are looking for the “good” jobs.
Now (15 years later) I have back to school at night and I have my BS and Masters. I have the SUV, I pay $150 a month for cable and internet. I have the IPhone and Ipad. But you know what, if something were to happen again. I would sell it all and I can always paint fences, mow lawns, fix plumbing. I am not above doing what it takes for my family. Why is it Obama’s job to make sure I have a job?
As for the original post. The US tax Laws are obscene, but Obama isn’t fixing the Tax structure itself, he is just getting the money from the people who typically don’t vote from him anyway. If this article said 82% of the voters would vote for Obama if he fixed the Tax code in the US. I would jump on board and support him. However, to blindly say that I am supporting someone because look what else is out there? We don’t even have official candidates yet? That is blind ignorance. I am not a democrat or republican. I will vote for the candidates that I feel will do the best job period.
As for raising the corporate taxes, that will just allow our government to spend the money unwisely as they have done for the last 100 years. We need to cut spending and get people off of assistance programs. Fix medicare and the endless pit of spending that it has become.
Do you think a cruise line needs to be based in the US? Raise there taxes. They will just move out of the US.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:37 pm
Wrong. There are not always jobs and especially right now. Many would be happy to take janitorial work, but I think you are out of touch with the job market
Pappy
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:43 pm
No, you are correct on that point. I am not in touch with the job market. I would not have the foggiest idea of how to even accomplish that task. I can tell you I just got a new job in the last 6 months So I became familiar with a particular set of jobs in a particular area. I also drive 45 miles because it was where the job was. The job is not in the field I was in before. However, I do not blame the government because there wasn’t my perfect job within 1 mile of my home.
I do not believe one person can be in touch with any job market; other than the immediate one they reside and even that scope of knowledge may be subject to a specific town or county or that persons area of expertise.
Corporate recruiters probably have the best understanding about the jobs are in the markets. Yet, I bet most of them would agree that they only know the jobs in the fields they recruit or in their areas they represent. They may have a global interpretation of the overall market but what is that based on?
My point is exactly what you pointed out. How is the president supposed to increase the number of x jobs in a particular town? He can’t. He can make fiscal policy changes that dump money into the economy. However, that may or may not increase the number of janitorial jobs in a particular town.
What he does have an influence on is government spending.
In theory tax refunds stimulate the economy be allowing us to purchase goods and services in our home towns. However, if I go buy some knock off widget from China how much of that stayed in the US? Yes, if I hire a janitor to clean my house, I have created a job, but only until that tax refund has ran out. Maybe I by an Iphone from an Apple.com. Great I purchased a product that at least part of the money stayed in the US. However, it was dropped shipped from China through Georgia and only a portion of that money also stayed in the US a good portion of that went outside of the US for overseas production and materials. So only a portion of that refund actually stimulated our internal economy.
What if the president instead had a goal of cutting government spending by 1% for his entire term? Eventually if the government could continue to run leaner then there would be no need the tax increase?
Maybe the President can promote policy changes that will allow less restrictive trade for a sector to complete globally from within the US. However, that does not guarantee the jobs will be created in that sector. It is still up to the company’s stake holders and their decisions if the US or a particular state is a good business decision.
Yes, there may not be janitorial work available where you live but what across town, what about the next town? What about clerical work, what about flipping burgers? It may not be glamorous, it may not be what a person did in the past or what a person was previously qualified to do, but it can pay the bills.
Do we weep for the typewriter repair person because computers have put them out of a job? No we expect them to grow with the jobs that are available. They must go learn a new profession that is available in the market and change or not be employed….
Going back to the original post, does it say why the government needs to raise the taxes? What the money needs to be spent on? I agree many big businesses are getting rich working with the holes in the tax laws and that is where we should look for change. Not just blindly taxing those who are making money legally. Because eventually we will be there targets for raised taxes.
Mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:39 am
I spent a decade as a zookeeper, and experienced far worse things than reaching my arm shoulder-deep into a drain filled with gorilla diarrhea. I’d be happy if a grocery chain gave me a job as a bag-boy, just so I could have a paycheck. I’m not afraid of real work, but the fact that so many are, and that so many managers are suspicious with my lack of desire for a management position despite having a degree, means college kids with little loyalty, ethics, or skills are going to get hired before me.
Some people might be sick of hearing about how there are no jobs, but I’m pretty damn sick of those who think every person without employment is a lazy slacker.
Xango
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:40 pm
Dude, what are you talking about? How much are the Koch brothers paying you to make up your little “feel good” story. Your entire ruse falls apart in your second to last paragraph. “As for raising the corporate taxes, that will just allow our government to spend the money unwisely”.
It is precisely because of the massive tax-dodging by the corporations and the super-rich that America is in debt to the degree that it is.
Go to democracy now and check the facts regarding corporate tax dodgers:
www.democracynow.org/2011...
Or better yet, read the study yourself:
www.ips-dc.org/resources/...
Pappy
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Xango I assure you my story is no ruse it is the absolute truth and therefore my story stands by itself you opinions of my beliefs may not be accepted.
Honestly, I do not care if you believe me or not and as for the Koch brothers I had to google them to even identify who they are.
A person does not acquire debt because they do not make enough money they acquire debt because they spend what they do not have. Or they spend what the project they will have in the future. Live within your means…
If the super rich are the problem then change the tax laws. Don’t target them unless they are doing something illegally. I agree they are getting rich off of us but if I don’t like what they are doing I should elect officials that want to change the laws or boycott the company. They are part of the problem, but I do not expect them to change unless we close the holes in the system.
I think we need to live within our means. If you think the government is spending your tax money wisely then go work in community hospital in a poorer neighborhood for a while. Just so you know I worked in Healthcare providing services to my local community and to the plethora of state prisons where prisoners were getting $4000 procedures they did not need.
When you asked the prisoner,
“Why are you having this CT scan today?
The answer was “I don’t know?”
Well are you having headaches?
No.
Have you had seizures?
No.
Have you fell and hit your head?
No.
Do you have any other medical conditions that would warrant you needing a CT scan?
No.
However, we were not allowed to turn the patient/prisoner away. Every other patient with insurance would have been turned away for lack of necessity. But not a prisoner, it was his right and we were not to question it. It led to my leaving the industry all together.
Programs like Medicare are sucking up the available tax dollars because too many people are take advantage of government services that were not intended for this level of load.
“At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost only about $ 12 billion by 1990 (a figure that included an allowance for inflation). This was a supposedly “conservative” estimate. But in 1990 Medicare actually cost $107 billion.” In 2010 medicare was 3.6 of GDP.
As for the study, I will read the original PDF. But my complaint stands don’t tax people who are being lawful even if they are part of the problem. Change the tax system. If not we can all be considered part of some problems we just haven’t been targeted yet.
Sarah Jones
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Eric, seriously, that is just crazy talk. I don’t know where you hear this stuff….I know only one person who is collecting unemployment right now and he has to go down and fill out forms and show how many jobs he’s applied for, on top of working with someone to get a job. He’s desperate for a job because he has two kids to feed. One of his kids is sick and he has no health insurance.
Instead of worrying about the lazy jobless people you are so sure exist, why not focus a bit of energy on the folks at the top who took all of your tax money promising to create jobs and then created NOT ONE JOB. How is that working for the money they took from us?
And then the handy Republicans who let them take that language out of the stimulus money, and so they paid themselves record money while creating zero jobs. I mean, if it’s lazy, entitled taxpayer funded scum bags you’re after, you’re looking in the wrong place.
jpm
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:06 am
amen. Reagan left with the biggest deficit in history; until bush came along; and this trickle down theory doesn’t work.
many rich people are now coming out saying they should be taxed, yet republicans STILL dont’ want them to because they are more worried about their party looking good than doing right. That’s un american.
People need to be taxed the same. When Warren Buffett says his secretary is getting taxed for 37% of her income and he’s getting taxed for 17% of his income, something is big time wrong and he even said that.
Wake up republicans; start doing whats right and stop worshiping your political party.
DK
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:06 pm
Excuse me.. Warren Buffett is a hypocrite. I am not proud to say I live in Omaha. If he truly wanted to pay more in taxes.. he could easily do so. Fill out a 1040 and stop claiming his private corporate jet as a tax deduction. Did you know Warran Buffutt just helped to ‘bail out’ Bank of America.. and in doing so he immediately made $700,000,000… that’s 700 million in 30 mins. You think he did that as a charity??! This guy is a complete fraud…
Sources:
blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/...
blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/...
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Sorry, dude. that’s not how it works. Not having to go to work means the rest of the household resents you for being unemployed; because it cuts into car repairs, being able to go to the doctor or dentist, vet bills, what have you. Adding to the humiliation of getting fired for something you had no control over (which is the only way to get Unemployment Compensation- laid off, or in my case, fired for getting injured on the job), is having to ask for assistance in the first place. UEC requires that you list the positions you apply for, subject to random checks to verify that an application was made. Only then can you get the $200 or so per week, because the cap hovers around 40% of your original paycheck. After I pay my share of the bills, if there’s any left, I can use that money to print resumes & cover letters to drop off at potential job sites.
Don’t buy into the Welfare Queen myth, because they only account for a small percentage of people on assistance. If you’re getting less on your paycheck than I am on UEC, Cantor and Boehner would tell you that you obviously haven’t applied yourself. Then again, according to them (and based on your comment) I’m a lazy scam artist who has no motivation to do anything productive. Never mind that despite an 80% hearing loss, I went to school for a scientific degree. Thanks to the deliberate withholding of information by my supervisors, I lost my career when I was injured on the job.
Now I get to spend my days visiting doctors or arguing with Worker’s Comp to get medical care when I’m not looking for work or trying to figure out what to do with the rest of my life. Being deaf, and in recovery from my accident, means I can’t apply for a significant amount of jobs. Having a degree hurts more than it helps, because employers don’t want to pay for that education- they either don’t believe I’m willing to accept that stockroom job because they think I’ll leave for something in my field (which my injuries prevent), or that I will angle for their position (even though I want nothing to do with paperwork). Luckily, I still have someone who cares enough to not kick me out, so I’m not at rock bottom yet.
I’m aware that there are people who game the system- but that applies everywhere. Think about where you work: how many of your co-workers get the same pay as you, or more, but contribute less than you? This is just my story. I want you to be aware of at least one person before you parrot the same ignorance spouted by the right wing since Ronald Reagan’s fantasy of Cadillac Kings living on the backs of America.
Save your comments for the political shills of the corporations and CEOs who pay less taxes than I do without having a job.
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:25 am
Hate to tell you Eric, I AM on unemployment, I guarantee I DON’T make more than you ($173.00 a week, I can find fry cooks at McDonalds that make more on minimum wage), and to get my “Free hand-out” I had to actually be employed for at least 18 months prior to filing/collecting a single dime, as well as showing PROOF (YES, in writing) that I have applied for multiple jobs each week. Also, you obviously don’t know that it’s NOT automatically 99 weeks worth either, it’s only 73. The EXTENDED benefits could go up to the full 99 weeks. Also Mr Eric, we STILL have to pay taxes on our “free hand-out”, even though it was MY own tax dollars that provided me with this “entitlement”. Actually, it’s been 9 years since I was unemployed for more than a month, and Ive only had 2 years of not having a job in the last 20 years since my 1st job at the age of 15 (I’ve also done the 55+ hours/week for minimal pay as well Mr. Eric, it doesn’t make you any who works only the 40 they are able to, just to scrape by). But hey, my lazy butt probably deserved to be laid off in YOUR opinion, Right Mr Eric? even though you know NOTHING about me. (Or anything about how unemployment works, obviously.)
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:30 am
So resign. People who hate the poor love to go on about them living in luxury on their unemployment. It is a lie. Always has been. And we know you hate the poor because you advocate for a flat tax which would disproportionatly hurt the poor.
Marc McKenzie
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 6:37 pm
As great as this article is–and that it offers hope–there is still an 800lb gorilla in the room.
It’s this: Exactly HOW is the President supposed to raise taxes?
I mean, I’m reading, “President Obama can raise taxes on the rich.” But still…how?
He can propose to raise taxes (and has done so), and he can also take the GOP to task for not caring about the American people (and he has done this, repeatedly).
But raising taxes requires legislation. Legislation that has to be passed by Congress. As far as I know, from remembering the rules set down by the Constitution, it cannot be done by a Presidential Executive Order.
So….a tax increase is going to have to come legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. And right now, one branch of Congress, the House, is under the control of Republicans who have shown that they are willing to throw as many wrenches into the gears of government to assure that the President only serves one term.
So we want the President to raise taxes. I agree. It is needed. The problem is that the apparatus he needs to do it is currently in the hands of people who are, to be charitable, insane.
Just my 2-cents. I’m sorry if it seems like I’m playing the wet blanket here.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 7:17 pm
No you are right. One can only hope that sense comes to the GOP and some defect
momly
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 7:17 pm
That’s a good point; but if he is re-elected, their need to throw monkey feces… er, wrenches is no longer on the table. PLUS, if they continue to gum up the works, voters have an opportunity to boot them in ’14. Or recall them.
Nobody Special
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 7:22 pm
The short answer is he can fight the republicans for tax increases until the next election, even if it doesn’t garner an increase, it will show Americans who he is fighting for and who the Republicans are fighting for. I want Obama to fight for these things and so do a majority as confirmed by this article. Getting a tax increase is the ultimate goal even if it takes until after the elections.
Nate
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:52 am
Its intentions that matter after all. Do you wonder now why this didn’t get done when he had the congress?
No. Never mind all that.
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:53 am
@ Shiva, Marc and JPM, I agree. @ Nate, the reason it didn’t get done in the nearly 4 years prior, is due to the fact that the “Bush tax breaks” on the wealthy had a set term. Once that expired, The President DID attempt to remove the initial tax breaks as a start, and was rebuffed by the Republicans in the house that quite clearly stated that they would refuse to extend those much needed unemployment benefits to the (at the time) over 10% of Americans out of work unless those same tax breaks enact by former Pres. Bush were extended as well. Pres. Obama waited till NEARLY the last minute to agree even though I personally still think he gave in too quickly and easily to their demands. (Let’s not forget that that number of a 10% unemployment rate is based SOLELY on those who filed unemployment claims. Not including those who didn’t qualify, or had already exhausted their benefits by that time due to the earlier layoffs at the start of the “housing bubble” crisis. Which means that the actual figure is considerably higher.)
jpm
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 7:08 am
You are right; and with the extreme hate of the republicans for obama (I’m still ticked about the tar baby crap) that they aren’t going to allow for any type of changes.
I lost some faith in obama when he caved on getting rid of insurance companies. Their stock went up an avg. of 30% after obama agreed to keep them.
Until people stop worshiping their political party, nothing will change in this country.
Mimi Stewart
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 9:42 pm
What is missing from the “tax the rich” conversation, is that all Obama has to do is NOT sign an extension of the Bush tax cuts which are expiring at the end of 2012. That’s what he did last year: compromise with the GOP to extend unemployment and reduce taxes for everybody who is on payroll in exchange for continuing the Bush tax cuts for 2 more years. So now he just has to draw the line in the sand and not sign an extension.
are you serious
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 9:46 pm
no citation for these numbers. All your arguments are invalid.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 9:48 pm
1st sentence of the article.
Reading 101
Lawrence Chow
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 10:53 pm
you pretending to be smart
sarcasm 101
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 11:10 pm
No I simply proved I could read.
Aleina
Sep. 1st, 2011 at 10:05 pm
82%+ of Obama voters will vote to reelect him because he will be the only candidate that isn’t teatarded. goo.gl/dkHFC
SCOAMF
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:10 pm
So if only 82% of people that voted for Obama in 2008 vote for him in 2012 he will lose. It’s simple math whether you take the 2008 popular vote or break it down to what matters which is by state/electoral votes. At 82% Obama loses Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia which would have resulted in Obama 259 electoral votes vs. McCain 279 in 2008.
Let’s hope this poll is correct!
Glen
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:41 am
“An increase in their taxes translates into an increase in the price of their products which translates into a “tax” on everyone that buys their products”
This is a fallacy.
Now if you had said that higher corporate taxes lead to lower wages for said corporation you’d at least be in the ball park.
I’m just going to refer to Dave Johnson’s explanation because I’m tired and I’m going home.
“Taxes are not a cost that can be “passed on to the customer.” Taxes are calculated as a percentage of profits, after all costs are figured in. A well-run business charges the most it can get for its product or service. If the business has competitors it has to price its product or service in some relationship to competing products or services. Were a business to add to to prices to cover taxes this would increase the price above what had been determined to be the optimal price! If a company were able to raise prices to cover taxes the it would mean the company was previously negligent in not pricing as high as the market would bear.
And if the company was negligent, then increasing prices to cover taxes would increase profits, which would increase taxes, which would require an additional price increase, which would increase profits which would increase taxes. Etc. – you get the picture. It’s a silly idea.
In the same way, a properly-run business has as many employees as it needs. When profitability caused them to aply taxes, it means they employed the correct number of people to realize that profit, and certainly are not going to lay someone off because they made a profit that was taxed.”
Nate
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:00 am
“I’m just going to refer to Dave Johnson’s explanation”
Prattle on long enough and everyone will believe you out of sheer exhaustion?
This explanation assumes there is some sort of tax based on some measure of the pure profit of a business. A tax that also increases with the measure of profit? I can only imagine this is some kind of flat tax on corporate profit? Such a thing doesn’t exist. What is this jibberish?
Mark
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:42 am
Well said. I also think a great idea would be to replace all the current tax loopholes, refunds and credits with 1 tax credit. The bigger the percentage of a companies work force that is kept in the USA the higher credit they can claim. That’s it.
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:04 pm
Amen! Although I would add a tax break for companies that offer to dollar match/compensate employees that get retraining in their field, or the company’s industry, or even possibly return to school to get a degree/certification in same areas.
kanank
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:43 am
I didn’t vote for him in the last election. I would consider voting for him this election if he hangs all the crooked corporate execs who are outsourcing our jobs and using tax loopholes to avoid paying corporate tax on the revenues.
Wilhelm Cody
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:41 am
In fact, in 2013, tax rates will increase close to the levels in the Clinton administration. For Medicare taxes, the rates will increase beyond those levels. The burden will be proportionally heavier on the wealthy, both in percetage and absolute terms. Based on the information below, Obama should be a shoo in for raising taxes on the rich.
In 2013, income tax marginal rates are going to increase, under the law passed at the end of 2010. Due to the current party split in Congress, this is unlikely to be changed. The marginal rates for the wealthiest will go from 35% to 39.4%, plus some increase in phaseout of some deductions for those earning above around $200,000 per year amounting to another couple of percent increase in marginal rates.
But wait, there is more!
In 2013, Medicare tax rates on all wages for those earning above around $200,000 are going to increase 0.9% under the health care laws. In addition, investment income for the wealthiest (roughly those above $250,000 in income) will have an additional medicare tax of 3.8% on top of the income taxes already paid.
Even more! In 2013, the death tax will return to 2002 levels, so wealth in excess of 1 million dollars at time of death is taxed at 55%, instead of the current 35% on wealth in excess of 5 million dollars.
So taxes are going up on the wealthy. Perhaps what some folks want are taxes approaching 100% on the top 5% or so of earners and distributed to everyone else to even out the income.
Below are some sources for this information.
Marginal rates: taxes.about.com/od/Federa...
Medicare Inreases: www.medicare.org/home-mai...
Estate tax increases: wills.about.com/od/unders....
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:33 am
There is no such thing as a death tax. Your use of that slander shows your bias.
Wilhelm Cody
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Ebon is right that the term is not “death tax” but rather “estate and gift tax”. Regardless, it will still rise in 2013.
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:12 pm
but the other question remains: how many people have millionaire relatives who will leave that entire fortune to them? Not enough for the general public to worry about. It’s just a distraction from the fact that it takes a lifetime for the average person to earn a million dollars. Unless someone else pays all of that person’s bills and expenses from cradle to grave, there’s no way for most people to see that million dollars in one place.
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Those “Marginal rates are quite heavily skewed by the “marginal” reduction in the loopholes, deductions exemptions, and other, more specific tax breaks that are STILL going to be available, in comparison with those available to the lower tax brackets. I can read tax law too. I just am willing to look at the “fine print” as well…
Wilhelm Cody
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:12 pm
Nicholas is correct that there are a number of deductions and credits that apply(the common term is “loopholes” or “tax breaks”, unless you are the recipient of them, in which case they are “tax expenditures”, “stimulus”, or some such). Nevertheless, the increase in marginal rates will still occur. See the following links for a comparison of overall actual taxation by quintile of income for 2011 and estimates for 2013:
www.taxpolicycenter.org/n...
www.taxpolicycenter.org/n...
Many of those deductions and credits disappear as income rises (especially as folks get into the range of the AMT) but others do not. The most common example, usually as part of the AMT, are deductions for state taxes. These are no longer allowed in a calculation of AMT. Others do not disappear such as deductions for mortgage interest, inclduing that on second homes.
A significant advance would be limitation or even elimination of these tax expenditures for any reason. For instance, the home mortgage deduction could be limited to interest on the first $300,000 of mortgage and then for only the primary residence. Others might be better provided by direct expenditures rather than as tax breaks. This kind of cleaning up and simplification should be an important part of improvement of the tax system. Such a transition was quite successful at the end of the 1980′s but Congress cluttered up the system again.
Cleaning up the system is much better than adding contingencies and special benefits. The system is less expensive not only in accounting costs but in trying to figure out if someone is getting unexpected benefits or not. One of the reasons GE had very low taxes was all sorts of credits for their wind and other green energy systems and credits for hiring, for instance. The law of unintended consequences will always be with us, so KISS.
Mike
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:04 am
Anyone that thinks smoking a joint in my own home should be illegal is a FOOL. A fool with one less vote. #LyingAsshole
Anonymous
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:07 am
I may not be an expert on taxation, but how does Obama have the option of raising taxes on the rich? He can suggest all he wants, but thats all the power he has. Article 8, Section 1 of the Constitution defines who can create taxes. This is a horrible news title and comments about him raising taxes are even more comical.
Warren G. Richards
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:35 am
Who might people elect if President Obama’s and his Administration’s hands are still twisted behind his back by holding hostage the welfare of all of us regular people with unemployment checks or Social Security retirement or disability checks, the safety net that we pay into all our working lives? There is no logical choice other than President Obama and the Democrats. Are people letting the distractions distract them from President Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s accomplishments inspite of the unwavering and continual blockades from the Block & Blame Republicans?
Are people going to vote for another Republican Texas fraud, whose voice is either deep like a preacher OR tenor and twangy like a cowboy tending to the livestock, whose supposed state employment stats are vastly propped up by unsustainable minimum-wage jobs without any benefits? Or how about that fag hag married to the Big Gay Al character? Or maybe that quitter-governor Scarah Playin’? How about that Right to Lifer voted out of the senate from Southwestern Pennsylvania after claiming that his and his wife’s abortion was different? How about that goofball 1950s and 1960s old bigot? What about the black Teabagger who swears there’s no bigotry which is actually a dominant mindset of the Teabaggers with their KENYA and other signs? And what about the other GOP gems? Hello?
Do people need to be informed for the first time or reminded about Prescott Bush and Prescott Oil and Prescott Bush’s ties with the Nazis and the Republlican connections with the Koch Brothers’ ancestors? What about skipping ahead to modern days when Republican Senators McCain, Liebermann (Independent In Name Only), and Graham (with I think Condaleeza in tow), promised Muammar Gaddafi that they would help him secure military equipment from the United States? Republican politicians are war-mongers whose compassion and concern for people in the United States of America disappears when they look at their own bank accounts. They don’t give one flying Wallenda about any of our welfare –just as long as poor and working poor people prop them up with contributions, while the richest of the rich among us remain Republican-endorsed tax-evaders.
I just LOOOOOVE how so many people seem to forget the consistant and continual Block And Blame Republican obstructionist games that have gone on since his swearing-in oath. Hello? Look into Prescott Bush and Precott Oil and Prescott Bush’s very real ties to the Nazis. Look into Ronald Reagan’s Iran Contra conflict of interest. Look into his VeePee successor as POTUS and his/our expensive and ineffective air assault on Iraq. Look into the COOPERATIVE bipartisan Congress and the immense surplus that was built and then summarily squandered by the Bush-Cheney Administrations with their wars in Afghanistan & then losing focus for invading Iraq. Look just recently at how THEY then hit the Sunday morning TV news shows and TRIED taking credit for the Special Forces’ successful operation when they raided & killed Osama bin Laden under President Obama’s watch. Hello?
What about War Criminals GWB and Dick Cheney and Condaleeza Rice who openly and directly perjured herself during her 9/11 Investigation testimony? What makes any of you think that any Republican should ever be at the helm again when Republican politicians show absolutely NO INTEREST in their allegience to liberty and justice for all, and NO INTEREST in establishing Justice for us all or insuring domestic Tranquility for us all, or promoting the general Welfare for us all, or securing Liberty for all of ourselves and all of our Posterity, as ordained and established in the Constitution of the United States of America?
We must re-elect President Obama and the Democrats into a supermajority so that divisive piles of elephant crap like Darrell Issa (CA-R) cannot launch useless inconsequential investigations at the tax-payers’ expense.
Take care and hang in there if you can, everyone.
Your friend,
Warren
Warren G. Richards
Mesa AZ
Anona Moose
Sep. 6th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
I think its pretty apparent that people vote for talking points and not what really matters. If what Obama was doing by throwing more printed money at the economy was working, don’t you think the economy would be booming and he wouldn’t have ADDED
Anona Moose
Sep. 6th, 2011 at 10:21 pm
…another $4 trillion dollars to the deficit? It isn’t working! Putting more control on everyone isn’t working! He needs to start running the country like its a republic and not a democracy! America is not a democracy, its a republic.
Anne
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 3:02 am
I will vote for Barack Obama again, mainly because the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. But in addition, he needs a Congress that will have his back, which means that folks like Boehner and Cantor, along with their flunkies, need to go and be replaced by people who are really about helping Americans. It does no good to vote for Obama and then negate the effect of that vote by voting for Republiclowns to Congress or to state positions like Scott Walker, Rick Snyder, and Rick Scott.
usa
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 5:01 am
taxing the rich has been taking place already. it’s called gov’t regulations that make the corp owners pay more in fees (just not taxes). anyone ever stop to think how many of us work for corporations? don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Mark
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:08 am
Hi my friend! I want to say that this article is amazing, great written and come with almost all important infos. I would like to peer extra posts like this .
Kevin
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:11 am
I in no way assumed this that sometimes simple subjects such as the present also can become interesting.
Nathan
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:13 am
Fantastic goods from you, man. I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re simply extremely magnificent. I really like what you’ve bought here, certainly like what you are saying and the best way during which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still take care of to keep it sensible. I can’t wait to learn much more from you. This is really a wonderful site.
Maria
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:53 am
I think that politicians have lost sight of what is right and what is fair…if I’m going to be put into a higher tax bracket as my income increases then that same principle should apply to everyone regardless…rich, middle and the poor should all be subject to the same tax principles…Also on another point what is amazing to me is the ignorance that seems to circle around me on a regular basis, I hear people blaming the Obama administration because the economy is in a crap hole..hello has everyone forgotten about Bush and are they so completely unaware of the difficulty involved in fixing a broken economy especially when constantly bombarded with opposition and road blocks.
jpm
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 6:59 am
When even rich people are saying they are not taxed enough then you know it’s true big time.
Also big business. Kind of getting sick of Cisco and Microsoft bragging every year that they pay between 1-10 dollars in taxes.
Flat tax.
Allen Jones
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 8:40 am
The rich should not read the Bible. More specifically Mark 12: 43.
In this scripture, Jesus compliments the rich for being generous in their giving but…
Read the scripture for yourself. And if you don’t have a Bible I highly recommend you buy one. In the mean time Google Mark 12: 43.
Paul
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 9:57 am
As long as you continue to rob Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul’s vote.
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:35 am
And the classists will never vote for you.
Name
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:33 am
I’m 41, voted for Nader or Kerry the last 3 elections and I am not planning on voting for Obama. He’s a Neo-Con in Dem clothing. IF there is meaningful taxes on the rich I will change my mind and vote for him. I highly doubt I will be voting for him. He is all talk and leads from behind.
Jacen
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:46 am
If ALL of the people paid their taxes, this conversation wouldn’t be happening….50% of our country don’t pay taxes of any sort, while the “rich” pay an incredible percentage of the taxes in the US, something like90% or so.
Get a flat tax – everyone is equal that way, make it 15%, we’ll all be better off!
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:49 am
Not everyone makes enough money to pay taxes or is employed. Doesnt that scare you?
While the rich pay a good amount of the taxes, they do not pay their fair share. In other words they pay for the most part a much lower rate than middle class families do. I say take away all deductions and let everyone pay
Jacen
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 10:51 am
As long as it’s the same % across the board, it’s the same “inconvenience” for everyone, if you’re poor and make $100 a week, that’s $15 of tax, if you make $1000, that’s $1500. Then the rich are paying the same percentage as the middle class, and the poor. Everyone pays, then the problem will go away.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:03 am
I can agree with that
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:21 pm
even on unemployment, you still have to pay taxes. you get money from the government, yet you still have to pay them at the end of the year. meanwhile, GE and BP and Nike get bigger refunds than I’ve seen in a ten year stretch.
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:35 am
That is a lie. In fact, everything in that post is a lie.
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:40 pm
really? 50% don’t pay “any” taxes? And the rich pay “something like 90% or so”?? get some REAL numbers.. Besides the richest 1% of Americans OWN over 50% of the wealth!!! They SHOULD pay a much higher percentage! There is a Dollar amount called the “cost of living”, and even though I don’t have that exact figure on hand, I GUARANTEE that millionaires can afford it 5 times over, and that a VERY large portion of this country still somehow manages to scrape by with less than that. So explain to me how a person who could live 5 lifetimes on what they make in a year deserves to pay the same minimal amount of tax that people who can’t even afford to supply their children with the few simple items neccessary to succeed in school well enough to get into college, much less earn a scholarship? Did they earn those millions by cutting or outsourcing jobs to increase shareholder profits? raise their taxes.. Did they make those millions by adding more jobs, improving their employees quality of life through better healthcare and other benefits, thus improving productivity and overall efficiency? THAT should be a reason for a tax break/deduction.. NOT the undeserved hope and fairly consistently unproven track record that by giving these companies more money to spend, that they will simply “do the right thing” and single-handedly save our economy with heaps of “quality” jobs.. (which, by the way, has been proven in multiple studies. Look at Japan in the 90s, and current Denmark and Germany markets.)
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Sorry, but even at 10%, $1500 off of $15000 takes more out of living expenses than $15000 does from $150000. But then again, anyone who doesn’t make six figures or more is some sort of idiot, according to the right wing.
Ebon
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 11:31 am
The Tea Party are not fiscal conservatives. They are fascists too stupid, ignorant and arrogant to realise that is what they have become.
maruawe
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:14 pm
The sheep will follow whatever leads them . So this is not remarkable in the least. then you have the devout party person, who will pull the party lever . When voting a person should not have the Party lever on the machine available . This shows people are lazy and uninformed about the things that they are voting for in the first place.. I vote for the person that I think will do the best job. Party voters are a poor substitute for thinking and researching the issues….
Nicholas May
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:47 pm
I agree for the most part Maruawe. But as far as the majority (NOT all) of the Republican party has demonstrated quite often recently, I personally cannot trust their reasons, reasoning, logic, motive or judgement skills to date, to do what is my MY best interest, or that of the general public.
aa
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:32 pm
I’m pretty sure we didn’t vote for him. What we voted for was a political party
J Sullivan
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 12:36 pm
The results of this poll are hardly surprising. I estimate that at least 82% of the people with whom I have the misfortune of interacting on any given day are so stupid that were breathing not an act of the involuntary muscles, they would suffocate.
Mark
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Why is it the responsibility of others to create a job for YOU. Small business (not govt) is the engine of job creation. Create your own job and stop bitchin’ at others to do it for you. My wife and I started our own window washing company with a bucket, squeegee and soap. Contrary to popular belief, people don’t create businesses to hire other people or provide good benefits. They create businesses to…wait for it…make money for THEMSELVES *gasp*. If you can’t find a job, make a job for yourself. No it doesn’t take money to make money. If you don’t have financial capital, then use your sweat equity.
Who knows, maybe you will be one of those evil rich people one day.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:38 pm
The rich are not evil. The fact that they pay less tax percentages is.
Mark
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 1:54 pm
I know the rich aren’t evil, that was sarcasm. Whatever the percentage is that they pay, it’s not less than 0% that which is what half of the population pays in Federal Income Tax.
www.forbes.com/sites/belt...
Why would anyone want to fight for the scraps the Govt gives out? People whine that the unemployment “benefits” aren’t enough to live on but they keep fighting for it. Use it for what it was intended for, a temporary supplement and get your own gig going.
Jennifer
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:37 pm
I would vote for him. Heck, I would campaign for him if he removed the loopholes and made the rich and the corporations pay their fair share. It is beyond stupid that the republicans are fighting removing the tax breaks for the poor and middle class, but considers those removals to be “unfair” for corporations.
Jennifer
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 2:39 pm
fighting TO remove the tax breaks for the poor and middle class. Sorry, changed part of the sentence and got interrupted during the edit.
Jerry
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Well, if you vote for him because he raises taxes on the rich, THAT alone explains why he was elected in the first place. I guess Ya just can’t fix stupid, and it seems that stupid people have the right to vote in America. You were duped 2 1/2 years ago into “HOPE & CHANGE”, and you would be duped again, it seems.
Question for all you who would like to see taxes raised on the rich…which of you has ever worked for a poor person? Hmmm? Like it or not, taxing the rich will continue to drive America out of business, and more jobs will go away. That is how the economics works. Then again, I guess “Barry” will just print more money and take care of you all if that happens…go ahead and vote for him. Apparently leaching off of those who work hard is something you can be proud of… >:
Sarah Jones
Sep. 2nd, 2011 at 4:22 pm
You best stick to chatting with other FOX cultists, honey. That baloney is too thick to even start cutting.
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:02 pm
No, you just don’t have the right tools to cut is, “honey.”
Anne
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:10 pm
That was far from being the only reason we voted for him. The ugly, divisive rhetoric from the McCain/Palin campaign was especially repellent, for one thing. For another, President Obama outlined actual plans instead of demonizing his opponent. McCain actually intended to continue the Bush policies that got us into this mess in the first place, but he was trying to run from the fact that he had supported Bush 90% of the time. Third, McCain continued to show just how clueless and out of touch he was with everyday Americans. It was a frightening spectacle to see McCain’s public instances of forgetfulness which some attributed to his age. He mistakenly thought that adding Palin to his ticket would attract disappointed Hillary supporters, especially women. But once she opened her mouth to display her profound ignorance, during and after the GOP
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:27 pm
I saw nothing in that comment about why you voted for Obama. I only saw reasons you didn’t vote for the opponent…typical liberal rhetoric. On your point that “Obama plans instead of demonizing his opponent” I have a question – When is he going to stop blaming the previous administration for his problems? And what plan has he put forward as a solution for our economic issues? He is clearly out of his league, and electing his has been a huge mistake…one we cannot make again! A request – Name ONE thing that Obama has done that has had a positive impact on America…just one… (sigh)
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Obviously he as well as the rest of us kjnow when the problem started. As far as solving it he is doing that on his own. You are living on silly talking points. Typical right wing nut job rhetoric
His stimulus created up to 2.9 million jobs. He saved GM ansd Chrysler from going under and almost a million jobs wqorld wide.
He got a few million healthcare that is affordable when the republicans like yourself would rather see people die
If all you have is talking points then beat it. We have seen them all already
Anne
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 12:38 pm
@Jerry:
I liked the fact that he implemented health care reform, although it didn’t go quite far enough. I like how he employs diplomacy in conducting foreign policy rather than GW’s swaggering cowboy approach that has caused so many problems for us abroad. His stance on repealing DADT
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:14 pm
1. Health Care Reform will sink this country, but will be repealed before it is fully instituted, because Americans don’t want it – power hungry politicians do.
2. How has his “diplomacy” (ass kissing) helped America? GW at least had principles, and stood by them. “O” wants to negotiate with mindless, blood-thirsty dictators…NOT a good plan, and weakens our position of strength in the world. When will liberals get it? He is the laughing stock of the world because he has no principles…no backbone.
3. DADT worked, and did no harm…repealing it just made a special interest group happy…did NOTHING for America.
I will ask again to anyone reading this – What has Barry done that has had a positive impact on America?
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:23 pm
1. Conjuncture. Implemented it would take a few billion off the deficit. Americans are unhappy we did not get single payer. Read polls, learn
2. We have a far better relationship with country’s. What blood thirsty dictators? The same that Bush bribed to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan with us?
DADT does plenty for America, it reinforces that we all are indeed equal.
I already answered your last question and you just proved yourself a consumer of talking points.
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Conspiracy!
1. Lies. When has ANY government run program EVER cost what was projected? YOU read the latest polls – Americans do NOT want healthcare reform… www.rasmussenreports.com/... …Read a RECENT poll, learn…
2. Conspiracy! Run for the hills!
3. How does repealing DADT reinforce that we are all equal?
All you have done is spout out liberal talking points, and I haven’t read anything that Obama has done to improve America yet, talking point boy…
This is fun.
mikeyhatesit
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Those blood-thisty dictators are our colleagues, mind you!
Think about how the rest of the world sees us: We went to war to stop the Nazi conquest, but we never stopped going to war, because the military-industrial-congressional complex realized there was a profit to be made in world domination. We’ve gone after countries that impact our cost of resources: oil and precious metals- not people who oppress their own citizens. Those dictators we support or ignore. For fifty years we’ve taken over countries with the economic policies of the Chicago Boys and destroyed them from within. Look at what american companies wrought with deregulation in south america and southeast asia. Look at what foreign companies have done to the environment within our own borders. Yet because Uganda hates homosexuals, and Haiti has a democratically elected dictator, we don’t really intervene when it comes to improving their rights as human beings: political murders, rapes, poverty are A-OK with our Republican politicians. When we do invade a country, it’s to secure their natural resources for ourselves- not the safety of its citizens. I bet you still think that Saddam orchestrated 9/11 and was hoarding WMDs.
War is expensive, and leads to injuries that the country is responsible for taking care of, yet VA hospitals lose funding until the public notices. Vets are prevented by insurance companies to get early treatment that will require more expensive treatment later on.
HCR is designed to get people into clinics, and stop them from waiting on ailments that will necessitate hospitalization for stupid things, like letting a cold turn into bronchitis; or ignoring that lump that six months later requires chemotherapy. All because the insurance companies, who actually don’t produce any physical product, don’t want to actually pay out the money their clients have invested, and are entitled to, by attaching all sorts of conditions to the contracts.
When going into someone’s home, you are a guest. The President observing cultural traditions, like bowing, or not using his left hand to greet someone, doesn’t mean he’s weak. Both Bushes bowed to foreign leaders. It’s called respect, and diplomacy saves lives. Would you rather live in a world Obama pulled out some guns and leap sideways, John Woo style, and shot global leaders as a way to take over their countries?
As for how the world sees Obama, and us, look to their polls and press. Our standing internationally improved the moment he was elected. What makes us look like fools is how half of one third of our government is allowed to stop the process entirely, when they are not reversing decades of civil rights or bringing the entire global economy to the edge of bankruptcy because they can’t get past the idea that a white man isn’t in charge.
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 2:01 pm
Really?… I’ve got nothing… Wow… “Blood-thirsty dictators…let’s make them our colleagues”… Yeah…I can’t respond. Mike, I don’t know what to say. If you really believe this crap you just wrote, I can see why you call yourself “mikeyhatesit”…I guess I would hate it too. Woe…
Jerry
Sep. 3rd, 2011 at 1:55 pm
@Shiva – Jobs? LOL! Do you live under a rock? Did you see the latest jobs report? Talking points? How about basic economics…9.1% unemployment under the “regime” of King Obama. Housing is in the toilet. Consumer confidence is at almost record lows. Many see a second recession on the horizon. Inflation is on the rise quickly.
Millions have healthcare? You know someone who has it today that didn’t have it pre-reform? I would rather see people die? Have you even read ANYTHING about socialism/marxism? (Obama certainly has!)
Talking points??? Saving GM and Chrysler! He “saved” almost a million jobs world wide… Let’s move on! Obama rode the wave of that stimulus (still a bad idea), and it was already in motion when he took office. By the way, where are those jobs now?
Talking points? Why don’t you get off the blame GW kick too! GW was clearly not a fiscal conservative – much more liberal than we needed, and he spent way too much money. No conservative would ever argue differently. BUT, there comes a time when the successor (rep. or dem) has to decide that if it didn’t work before, then it certainly cannot work now. By the way, Obama has spent trillions more in 2 years than Bush did in 8!
You, and all libs, do have a very short memory though. The recession we were in at the end of Clinton’s 2nd term, was reversed by the Bush tax cuts…THAT’S RIGHT – TAX CUTS!
This president arrogantly insists that he can do it better. He knows the way, and the lowly masses just don’t understand. He can tax the “rich” better. LOL!… Math is math. It doesn’t work. Never has, and never will. Get over it.
Another question: Is there any government program that is well-run? Right, healthcare is no different.
If you want socialism, move to a country that offers it. America is about empowering the individual to make his/her dreams a reality – NOT about creating government-dependant leaches who can’t wipe their ass without big daddy government’s help. If THAT is the life you want then YOU beat it – America doesn’t want you!
Oh, BTW, I still haven’t gotten an answer…What has Obama done that has had a positive impact on America?
OneNiceDay
Sep. 4th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
I just hope that americans see that if he is reelected, stop all of the complaining, wining, and crying about jobs, unemployment, medicare, social security, taxes, gas prices, troops over seas, and any other problem thats been going on, or has gotten worse!!!
YOU ALL have voted for this, now the only way to stop it is to NOT vote for him,.. simple as that! And i dont know why hes running again?? Just because a “terrorist was double tapped under your term”…
If he raises the taxes on the rich then….. THERE WILL BE NO JOBS! come on people who supplies jobs? The corporations that have MONEY… or the local businesses men/women that has MONEY! If the taxes are raised, what makes anyone think that, rich business people are going to hire you??? They will be cutting people to PAY for the raised taxes! Americans just dont even think what something catastrophic like that would, do to everyone and more to the economy…. MONEY makes this world go round… If you try to tax it all, rich people will not spend… and if the money isnt circulating, things come to a halt….
(true story… I won a big sum of money a while ago, i went to a small town (about 5 hours from my home,just driving…) where they had two car dealerships in the whole town of 15,000 people or so residing. I went to the first car place, only a few workers were working, everyone was very nice, smiling, and very pleasant. i was talking to this one salesman and he said even though times were tough, their lot was doing ok but not great, but he had high hopes about life, and things in general… i asked him what was the highest vehicle on the lot, he said that they only had one and that was in the back shop, where they fixed there cars at. It was a car they have since last year and the owner paid a lot for the car, and this, and that. It was a 2010 chevy camero. Priced at 36,600. A super sport. he said that every time he got to drive it he felt like an important person…and gosh… I ended up buying that camero, and two other cars that day for my mom and sister. I ended up spending well over 75,000 on cars! But i was happy i did, and i wanted all the sales to go to my salesman. (He ended up with i guess a hefty sum just for helping me out) I got a letter from the owner thanking me for my purchases, and a couple of months later i was visiting a friend and i even seen a commercial, they had up and running :)… And to finish up the story, i (sent 6 boxes to every worker at that car lot. Inside each box was a “keep your heads up” note, a cashier check for 5,000 and 3,500 for a cruise, or vacation however they decided to spend it. It felt so good just giving back to people who really needed it….
I am 37 and what i personally saw, first handed, that if you make some type of big purchase things get up and running again….
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 4th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
Wrong. 2% of the wealthy provide jobs. Corporations in the US are setting on trillions and not hiring anyone in the US. However they are hiring overseas, like in China where the taxes are higher. There is nothing Obama has done to change what has been happening since the 1980′s. Just as many jobs went overseas under Bush as are now.
How do you explain when Clinton raised the taxes the corporations became much more productive and profitable? Dont fall for this dont tax the rich cause they wont give jobs, thats BS.
BTW, who has the most purchasing power in the US? The middle class. With the corporations not hiring Americans, they are telling us they doint need us.
Anona Moose
Sep. 6th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
I’m not rich and I wouldn’t vote for him. You couldn’t pay me to vote for him. I’m considered to be in the lower middle class bracket and I pay more taxes than anything else. Taxes are my #1 monthly bill(income, sales, local), then food. Taxes take about 30-35% of my income. My household food bill is higher than my mortgage. What direct taxation doesn’t get, inflation gets the rest. You morons that think you have it good apparently don’t track your spending habits. (Ignorance is bliss they say..) The Quicken bar chart doesn’t lie. If I had all or at least half of that tax money back, I could afford to maintain my home even with the current inflation rate. Instead, my home is crumbling around me and my family and there’s nothing I can do about it other than to go even further into debt to repair everything. Unfortunately, I’ve done that once already and 7 yrs later the same things need repaired/replaced again and I’m still paying on the last loan… so you morons go ahead and vote for that “change”. I’ll drop out of the system and you can go down with the Titanic with a smile on your face knowing that you won. Hurray for you…
rstx70
Sep. 7th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Wow, I am frightend for the future generations of Americans when I read these posts. Critial thinking is dead in America. Personal reponsibility has been usurped by the Government and too many Americans are happy to let someone else run their lives. Everyone is looking for a sugar daddy and a risk free life.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 7th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
Oh geeze, another one spouting talking points ver batim
abefroman
Sep. 8th, 2011 at 11:30 am
Someone has fed you a line of BS. So in other words your statement says in #3 that if the tax rates for the rich go down, the tax rates for the middle class automatically go up. This is absolutely not true of course so please explain to me how it makes any logical sense that the middle class will be paying more to make it up?
And Shiva, you have that backwards. Yes there is a revenue problem because of higher unemployment, but anyone that says we don’t have a spending problem has their head in the sand. We need to make major cuts to get this debt problem under control. If we continue to let it get out of hand we as a country will not last. They already reduced our credit rating as a country which is a HUGE deal! Interest rates will go up because of this making it even harder for the US to make it’s payments let alone reducing the debt.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 8th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
no I do not have it backwards. If we have full employment in this country we have no spending problems in the country would advance as a civilization. Now that we have low unemployment we have a spending problem. And as we make these cuts this country will not advance as a civilization. If you remember our credit rating was cut with one of the reasons being that a certain party would not go along with increased revenue.
also, given that bills must be paid by the country anything that is not paid by the wealthy who are not paying their share has to be made up by the middle class and the poor.
Shiva (Moderator)
Sep. 9th, 2011 at 11:50 am
You also have a rating with the public under that of Charles Manson. Best of luck.
I left this post here so everyone can see how uneducated the tea bags are, and how they always are what they accuse others of. I also wanted everyone to see and remember the silly talking points of the tea thuggery.
Here then in all his splender, the tea bag that would be a patriot.
by the way the class warfare is already in place. The tea bag patriots and the GOP are supporting only the very rich. Doesn’t that smack of class welfare do you? Or are you allowed to think