I wish the Democrats and Republicans would put their heads together and really think about what is good for America, especially for the lower and middle class and not their votes. Be party-less and come up with one plan together. Do they worry about their next pay check like I do? We are heading towards a crisis and yet we are still pretending that tomorrow will be okay. Hello? Do we even have a middle class society anymore? Maybe 3rd World Countries, India or China will give us some donations?
I'm for the GOP. Give millionaires back exactly what they paid - with reasonable interest and not one cent more when it comes to Social Security, Medicare, VA, any government assistance. I watched a lady that inherited $2 million during her last 6 months of cancer. Medicare paid all her medical bills and she drew a SS check off her husband. She never worked or paid into the system. She died with $2 million dollars in the bank and with America in more debt than any time in history. Reform now!
Thanks to liberal policies America can no longer afford to pay for medicare, social security, unemployment and many other services. We also need to lower the minimum wage to $2/hr in order to compete with China and bring jobs back home. Fiscally responsible conservatives like Paul Ryan and Michele Bachmann know this and are currently
working to end these wasteful handout programs and bring the minimum wage down so that America can be great again. God bless the GOP!
whats the mystery? the "rich" folks who own your job need money for your paycheck and benefits. do you like having a job? less money means less jobs. more money means more jobs, thus increasing the economy. its basic economics and its easy to understand if you remove your useless emotional crap and prejudices. how did our society get so stupid, oh yah, we trusted the government to educate us. by the way, its the super ultra rich, like obama, who want to take money from job creators, why
@TumisHumis A. YOu clearly don't have a clue when it comes to macroeconomic theory or you would understand that tax policy had nothing to do with Greece's failures. B. Nobody is talking about "taxing the shit out of rich people". THe last time the top bracket had such low tax rates was 1950! We are just asking that we return to the Clinton rates that allowed us to see one of the largest and longest expansions in U.S. history. Rich people sure were leaving America in the 90's huh? LOL!!!!
The ONLY way to bring jobs back to America is to lower the minimum wage to $2/hr.
This is the only way we can compete with China. Paul Ryan and my fellow republicans need to act on this now. Employers also should not have to carry the burdern of paying for health care either. Go get em Paul!
The top 10% of the US pay over 90% of the taxes as it is, 47% of the US pays no federal or state taxes, so why should the rich have to pay more taxes, this is America where its posible for anyone to prosper. what I dont get is how you Liberals think you can just sit on your butts being lazy and expect the rich to suport you. we are not supose to be a socialist government. I grew up poor as poor gets I work my butt off and make 120k a year (top 10%)so why should i have to pay for you?
@slideride You are assuming everyone who make less than you are somehow lazy. What we are talking about are middle class hardworking people just as you once were.
However the tax is not equal, not even close. We don't all pay the same % of taxes. The rich pays less % of taxes than people who are middle class or lower. If the income tax is the same % across the board, then it is fair since that is what income tax is about.
You think your tax actually supports the poor? Don't kid yourself.
@muffinman5323 It's because our police force is a police force, they don't sit inside all day and wait to break up riots like in greece, they're out there doing their jobs.
@DeepSouth16 Also go look at the weighting in the budget per income level of necessities then substract it from the 100% you'll see that out of what's left of their budget taxes are far more important that those of the richer. Also take into account that most of the richer people's income is plus-value so you cut their tax rate by around 50% (their companies also receive subsidies...). You'll find it interesting how much tighter their budget is and how much harder it is with so little.
@DeepSouth16 If someone really is ressourceful, he shouldn't be afraid to pay the same rates as everyone else.
I'll also give you a couple examples of people not worth their money : Any professionnal athletes over 1m, Paris hilton, George W Bush, Facebook, and the list goes on. I'm sure you can name a lot of undeserving ones and probably on the other side as well (friends/family that have the potential, but can't afford it).
Inventors are rarely the ones getting rich of their ideas.
@DeepSouth16 I'm not talking about everyone of the rich, but the ones that are doing nothing new, intelligent, etc. You shouldn't be able to pay lower tax rates because you got there or were already there. What's the point in competition if you make sure the ones already at the top cannot get caught up by equally talented people and how people already at the top that are not worth their money should be allowed to stay there. Plus value is taxed at 50% of the 35% and that's what they live on.
@DeepSouth16 Are you for the return of a monarchy (being born rich makes it impossible for you to fail and being born poor makes it impossible for you to succeed)? Cutting in social security means that even if you're talented an illness will take away all that you've made so far. Cutting in educations means you won't have the tools. Reducing taxes for the rich means that the wealth already in banks will never disappear even when you do absolutely nothing and get fat on the dividends...
@dadumbazz There's also the fact that people that have planned for their retirement have included the old benifits when they were with a financial advisor. Let's also add that not everyone can work that late as they do physical work. You need to also know that they have more than their fair share of the current wealth especially when you think that ammongst them are : people already born right, by luck (facebook stolen idea and lucky that people went to his instead of others), criminals, etc.
@DeepSouth16 thank you for clearing that up.it always helps to resort to name calling to show people how right you are.ill see you in church next week.treat others the way you would like to be treated.
@DeepSouth16 Look your bigotry shows up what a shock typical bigot southerner.Still fighting the civil war you guys lost I see , and we both already know that most republicans are closet happy. Sorry to disappoint you but you can tell your wing nut buddies like larry craig, Lee, Mark foley, and all your evangelical wing nuts leaders that are always sleeping with young boys and male prostitutes lol that I don't swing that way,but I am pretty sure that you do.
I'm a republican 100% tax the rich sounds like a very good idea to me they have made millions of dollars from exploiting the middle and lower class.like 3% of people control 95% of the money its time they give back some.they've bleed us for years its time they pay a little extra.Ive never voted for anyone but republicans but if they keep trying to stop tax the rich i will vote Democrat.I'm sick of making it easy on the rich.give the middle and lower class a break for once.
+NEVER VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN AGAIN! The PAUL RYAN BUDGET PLAN will DESTROY MEDICARE for those of us 54 years or younger. IMAGINE being an old man & having to do BATTLE with a PRIVATEinsurance company BECAUSE THE voucher you got is not enough to pay for the coverage you need or you just can't get the coverage you need for your illness! REPUBLICONS slipped this into their budget proposal with NO DISCUSSION OR DEBATE! TELL YOUR STATE REPUBLICON$ THAT YOU WILL NEVER VOTE FOR A REPUBLICON AGAIN!
@MrJeggus ... LOL... You sound so educated! Let me guess; Havard? Yale? Princeton? Joe's Car Wash? BINGO!!! I knew you was a racist! Stereotyping people by race, religion, sex, location is all the same. I can't help it if I allot smarter than you. Don't blame me, your DNA just sucks! LOL
@MrJeggus ... So you are defending Obama, like I said. That says more about you than me. You mean the endless wars Obama has continued and even started a 3rd? Those? Oh the racist card! What took you so long? You liberals usually start out with racist since you certainly can't defend his policies. God forbid anyone disagrees with a black guy, as that can only mean you are a racist right? Nice try, but that attempt to silence my genius has failed! Keep up the 5th grade name calling! LOL
@MrJeggus ... Well, maybe you ought to wake up and take a whiff of smelling salt because your hero has SPENT and SPENT and SPENT to the tune of doubling our national debt. Yes, as much as George Washington thru George Bush combined. How is that going? The economy is far worse off today than the day he took office and our debt is out of control. Your arguement is no longer a theory. It has been in action and is an obvious failure! And you defend it? What a moron!!!
Which of the "great" GOP candidates do you support? Huckabee? Palin? Gingrich? Trump?? Bachmann?? The only semi-serious person you have is Romney, who has had to flipflop on every issue to appease the rednecks and religious fanatics. Sane, moderate conservatives like David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Colin Powell, etc. will probably once again be voting for Obama . . .
The real challenge is this: Explain why the rich need tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts went into effect in 2001. Where are the jobs they were supposed to create? All that's happened is that wealth has become more and more concentrated in the hands of the few while the middle class bears an unfair burden. Obama is right that the cuts need to expire in 2012.
@sutircomed under the bush tax cuts, unemployment was reduced to 4-5 percent for years. That was the point where you guys were bitching about 200-300 billion in deficts per year, now you guys are all for 1500 billion or more a year. What changed? BTW if you striped the entire fortune from every rich person on the planet you couldn't pay for obamas spending.
@mrfrednoname What changed, of course, is that the economy collapsed. Economists on both sides agreed the bailouts were necessary. We are still not at all "for" deficits and will work to eliminate them. Raising taxes on the wealthiest is just part of what needs to be done.
@mrfrednoname Not true. It was W's administration that started the bailouts. It was only when Obama became president that conservatives suddenly changed their tune for purely partisan reasons . . .
@sutircomed "Economists on both sides agreed the bailouts were necessary." That's not true at all, only keynsians really do. How else do you justify pumping tons of money into systems which failed in the past, rather then letting new ones emerge?
You'd have to cut almost everything and raise taxes massively on almost everyone to keep the government afloat. There's no evidence that that's going to happen, it's impossible the way the political system is set up.
The top 1% in the U.S. own 40% of the wealth. They should be paying more taxes, giving back to the country that has given them so much, and existing loopholes should be closed. The voodoo economics notion that low taxes for the rich = more jobs has been exploded (yet again) by the events of the last decade. Taxes for the rich are ultra-low, and unemployment is high. Even an idiot can see it isn't working. It's time to get serious again.
@sutircomed that's a false dichotomy. We do not have to either have corporatism or socialism with no other options. Instead simply stop government intervention which caused the problems in the first place. Then we can talk about wealth redistribution.
@Houshalter You're the one who mentioned "socialism", not me. I said we should raise taxes on the rich. Under Republican President Eisenhower the top tax bracket was 91%, and those were very prosperous times. Wealth redistribution is already going on--taxpayer money funding a war based on lies (Iraq) and corporate welfare. It's time to redistribute in a way that helps the majority of people, not merchants of war and the rich.
@sutircomed the rich never paid tax rates that high, they got out through loopholes. For the most part it burdened the upper middle class and "new money" so to prevent competetion with the super rich. Also, where else were businesses supposed to go at that time? Most of the world was recovering from WWII, under communism, or in the third world. The US had a huge advantage, and government spending and debt were also much lower.
@mrfrednoname "purges, slaughters and genocide" -- Christians have done these things too. Check out the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the conquest of the New World. You also cannot blame Marx for the actions of Stalin and Mao. Mind you, I'm no Marxist, but it's clear Marx did not intend his ideas to be used to create totalitarian states.
@sutircomed I do blame marx for those actions because it is his system that led to it and has always led to it in every single case it has been tried. The 2 biggest tyrants in the 20th century, Mao and Stalin both were marxists
@mrfrednoname Hitler said: “I absolutely insist on protecting private property ... we must encourage private initiative." Both fascism and capitalism are more flexible than you portray them, and Nazism was definitely capitalist; in fact, fascists have often advocated what they call "heroic capitalism" or "super-capitalism."
@sutircomed Seriously, are you trying to tell me that hitlers WORDS should be believed???? His actions show that he took over industry and squashed captialism.
@mrfrednoname Not that it truly matters in the context of the current budget situation, but, yes, Nazism was both corporatist and capitalistic. What matters right now is that the American middle class doesn't get ground into dust so that the fat cats can become fatter still.
@mrfrednoname No one here is arguing for Marxism, so this is a pointless exercise. I might as well ask you to name a successful country based on Nazism.
obamas plan? rasie taxes by 4 trillion over 12 yeaqrs cutting the defict by 333 billion per year while the deficit remains above 1 trillion a year. Face it, this hate fest about the rich doesn't even come close to addressing the defict. it is effectively a drop in the bucket.
@mrfrednoname Pollution and global warming are already affecting us. It's time that we look toward the future, not simply stay stuck with the status quo -- dirty air, oil spills, and foreign wars to protect our "interests." Also, your claim about a lower standard of living is false. The development of new energy sources will create huge numbers of jobs.
@sutircomed That may be true about the jobs but it proves my point about increased prices because those jobs will have to be paid for. Global warming? What global warming?
@mrfrednoname Ah, so you are a science denier. 2010 was the warmest year on record. All ten of the warmest years on record have occurred since 1998. My advice is pay attention to NASA not to the Koch bros.
@mrfrednoname The Koch bros are extremely rich oilmen who have spent $55 million+ funding anti-science groups. Detailed climate records exist since the 1850s.
@sutircomed 1850's for the entire palnet? LOL even the parts nobody had been to yet?? Since when is qestioning a scientific theory "anti-science"??? Thats part of the scientific method for gods sake.
@mrfrednoname "The period for which reasonably reliable instrumental records of near-surface temperature exist with quasi-global coverage is generally considered to begin around 1850."--Wikipedia (Even Hawaii had been discovered by 1778 . . .)
@sutircomed "new energy sources will create huge numbers of jobs." Paying people to dig ditches and fill them back up will create huge numbers of jobs as well. The number of jobs is not the goal or a metric of success of an economy. If it wasn't for minimum wage, almost everyone could have a job if they wanted one anyways. Without fiat currency, the purchasing power of wages and saved money would also rise over time also.
@Houshalter This is a poor argument for maintaining the status quo of dirty air, oil spills, and foreign wars. Clean energy is providing a larger percentage of global energy needs every year, and it is a sector that will continue to grow.
@sutircomed of course it will, it's inevitable. It doesn't mean it needs artificial taxpayer support to prop it up, and if it does, it shouldn't be done at all. At the moment alternative energy sources are practical for alot more purposes then the used to be, but for most things the cost/benefit simply isn't good enough.
@Houshalter The U.S. needs to take the lead in developing alternative energy sources so that we don't get left behind in the future. Most taxpayer support right now still subsidizes fossil fuels. That needs to change.
@sutircomed yes, except I have yet to see an environmentalist against our ridiculous state-run infrastructure which is basically a giant subsidy for oil and car companies. The future of oil is also really hard to predict. If you knew with a good deal of certainty what the future supply and demand would be, you could buy it up oil now and sell it later at great profit, also driving up the price now and lowering it later so to smooth the transition.
@edeal86 What people are misled by is the reporters who instead of reporting the year-to-year changes in tax rates, -report on the tax laws themselves which were patched from the laws passed during the "Bush Tax Cuts", which were cutting the rates from laws from 13 years ago, so when the reporters say Republicans are trying to "give tax cuts to the rich", they are referring to extending tax cuts relative to rates 13 years ago, which has absolutely nothing to do with changing the current rates.
@gilbet I actually have a list of the tax rate history, and the tax's were lowered when Bush was elected into office. So no, this is applying to the current tax rates. Not the rates of the 1990's which were way more beneficial to our economy.
What people are misled by is the reporters who instead of reporting the year-to-year changes in tax rates, they report on the tax laws themselves which were patched from the laws passed during the "Bush Tax Cuts", which were cutting the rates from laws from 13 years ago.
So when the reporters say Republicans are trying to "give tax cuts to the rich", they are referring to extending tax cuts relative to rates from 13 years ago, which has absolutely nothing to do with changing the current rates.
There needs to be an incentive for the "rich" side to contribute to the country; and that's the part of the warfare the middle class is loosing out on.
You don't win a war being timid, and trade embargo take lifetimes to produce results (ask Cuba) so we cant even boycott business effectively.
It will take a radical reaction to change the action.....
Such simple economics could be applied but here in america that's a stretch. Simple taxation depending on your gross income and current wealth (so of course the wealthier will be taxed more and I sure won't loose any sleep over that) and we need to enact a simple 'cost of living wage increase'. At this rate their will be no middle class and we'll be just another third world country. If there's ever been a time for revolution- it's now...
Define "earned it." With you earned the money from the sweat off your brow then you have a point, but what is usually being discussed here are the top 10% of income earners who hold nearly 90% of the nation's wealth.
How did they "earn" that? Tax breaks, tax subsidies, hiring overseas labor, cutting safety costs, etc. - a lot on the backs of the working men and women who do much more to actually earn their money.
This is insane, Western europe has tax cuts exceeding 52% for personal incomeof about USD 75,000.- and up. how on earth the US can continue to accept these ridiculous levels of personal income tax is beyond me.
If poor people could learn to stop shitting out children like demented rabbits then they maybe they wouldn't be so poor. Every notice how the richer parts of the world limit themselves? That's why they stay rich and the morons stay poor so don't expect them to pay for you little porch monkeys because you haven't learnt to use a condom.
@Silkie341 If too many kids are really the reason why people are so poor, why are so many Republicans against Planned Parenthood. Better yet, what about those who are already poor and WITHOUT children? I like your idea of the world, where the only reason anyone is poor, is because of too many kid and not loans, medical bills, getting sacked from their job as 'cost-reduction' and such.
@Silkie341 Okay first of all, most people use Birth Control and Condoms but something you may not know about Condoms and Birth Control they aren't 100% effective. Condoms are 97% effective, meaning there is a 3% chance you could get pregnant. With Birth Control the pill is 99.99% effective, with a .01% possibility of getting pregnant it happens. I have 3 family members, 1 of which can tell you what Contraceptive method she was on each time that method failed.
rich ppl are evil! and i am a dumbass! if the govenment only did what the constitution said then they couldnt spend all the money coming in at a further reduced tax rate. if u hate rich ppl based on the fact that they are rich. you are a bigot and a evious pawn that has been twisted by lust for things you have not achived!
More divide and conquer nonsense. It's like lala land when these douche bags pretend that taxing the rich is the only answer. News flash, you can take all their money and it's not enough for the progressive agenda. It's never enough.
Idea. Eliminate all INCOME tax. Replace it with consumption tax. Progressives get what they want. As much tax revenue as the economy can produce. Rich people buy more, they pay more tax.
@cooperbry The problem is that the rich aren't constantly spending, and that is the major assumption of trickle down theory. Plus, given the amount of middle men involved, the amount that trickles down is trivial. Far better to give tax cuts to the lower classes, who spend money much more often, and with fewer middle men, the amount that trickles down, or I suppose up in this case, is far from trivial.
@halo07guy2 The fallacy with that thinking is that spending is the only activity in the economy that matters. Savings is equally if not more important an activity as spending.
@cooperbry True. But spending is what creates income. The main idea behind trickle down is that the rich we'll spend much more than the average man, and do so repeatedly. In reality, it is not constant, whereas spending by the lower classes is pretty much constant, given their large numbers.
If you have one rich person spending money, and 100 average people, who is going to create more income, given that they each purchase once and at the same place?
@halo07guy2 "spending is what creates income." Really? Then why doesn't the government just print off hundred dollar bills and hand them out for people to spend? We'd be generating income. We wouldn't need rich people to hire anyone for jobs since everyone would be earning more than enough income to provide for themselves.
@TehBANN3D Because printing money like that leads to inflation. The rich aren't the ones that create jobs. It's the middle and lower classes, who spend much more money more frequently, unless said rich person decides to buy a $120,000 yacht every other day.
The cumulative spending of the lower classes is greater than that of the rich. You can say they invest, but where do they invest? Overseas, in which case their money is going overseas, not here.
@halo07guy2 And what's wrong with inflation? If anything, it would entice people to spend more since in the long term all cash savings will be worth less. This means immediate income will increase, since spending = income.
And most wealthy people do not hold massive amounts of cash assets. They invest it in property, stock, bonds, commodities, things that actually yield some sort of output.
@halo07guy2 Spending creates income? No. Spending creates an economy, but the economy offers nothing to the federal budget. In fact, corporations don't pay taxes. Your explanation would be best suited towards helping a struggling economy rather then fixing a deficit.
TIME IS OVER.IT WOULD START 1994,NOSTRADAMUS SAID BET.7 AND 20 YRS.1994 PLUS 7,SEPT.2001, NEW YORK’S TWIN TOWER.THE KING OF TERROR WOULD ENTER EUROPE.OSAMA WAS GIVEN CITIZENSHIP IN BOSNIA,SOUTHERN EUROPE IN 1993..NEWS TODAY:MID.EAST UPRISING,AL QAEDA IN LIBYA..FAMINE,PESTILENCE,EARTH¬QUAKES EVERYWHERE.TO NON BELIEVERS REPENT SAVE YOUR SOULS AND PRAY FOR OTHERS.JESUS IS COMING,RAPTURE IS COMING!LISTEN TO PROPHET OWUOR WHO MADE THE RAIN FALL.type in dr owuor rain AND PAUL BEGLEY IN YOUTUBE.
I hate how the GOP and dems protect the corporations that don't need any help. :/ How am I going to get a job if the jobs move and there is no money here for people to start small businesses? All the Repubs. think they can get something out of nothing.
The sad thing is that Ryan's budget proposal is not enough. We need to slash taxes on everyone and drastically cut spending. Rand Paul is the only one that gets it and neither party is giving him the time of day.
Also, I am against both corporate and social welfare.
@rocky19421 I was talking about Rand Paul, but since you brought it up, Ron Paul has been consistent (except for his illegal alien stance) for 30 years. When you zombies stop watching American Idol and stop gawking over the Royal wedding, maybe you'll pull your head out of your ass to see what is exactly going on. So far, I see Cenk as a puppet or just plain ignorant. Either case, I am not impressed with his "insights".
@satarnag Nice to meet you I'm Rand Paul. Oh You have'nt, Well Maybe you've heard of my father Ron Paul. Fishsticks? No Mrs paul is not my mom. Oh I know that they are crispy and delicious. No my father is the one who ran for President. No I'm not joking. Really he was in a debate and everything. Well about 6% of republicans. I might run too? No I won't be giving out free coupons for fishstick.
@MrFrank440 - If it weren't for these poor people there would be no jobs to work. Business owners don't create shit for nothing. Someone has to buy it. Demand creates jobs, not rich people.
@A86 Whats wrong with being wealthy? Im not-but would like to be. Not going to happen for me. When I was your age this was a very different country. Do you see a problem with our mounting debt? Im finding it more difficult to survive. Wish there was a 3rd party. Peace
@MrFrank440 - It becomes a bad thing when wealth comes from exploitation, corruption and undue/undeserved power.
The mounting debt does indeed worry me and IMO a lot of Americans aren't serious about solving it because a lot of Americans still aren't willing to face what's causing it. The biggest culprit being: our Empire. I wish there was a third party too and I wish people would get serious.
@A86: The vast majority of corporations are not involved in exploitation, corruption, etc. Why does the left always lump all corporations into one category? That's asinine.
There are FAR MORE on the bottom level who take advantage of welfare, etc.
You're right about one thing. "Most" don't care about the debt/spending. They have the mind-set that "someone else" will pay for it, though we know they're sadly mistaken. And sorry ~ but this seems to be typical of many Liberals.
@restlesspride666 GOP wants lower tax rates for the rich = LESS revenue = MORE gov't debt and tries to decrease spending by going after programs that help the poor and low income people. Is that what Jesus would do?
@2010GOP - The statutory corporate tax rate in the US is up to 39%. The effective tax rate of your average corporation is around 20%. A lot of corporations pay no taxes at all. Of all taxes combined the bottom 90% pay around 60%+ of the taxes while the top 10% pay less than 40% of the taxes despite owning around 70% of the nation's wealth.
Let's not even get into how many trillions of taxpayer money has gone into subsidies, tax breaks, tax credits, etc. for the rich despite outsourcing.
@2010GOP - "There are FAR MORE on the bottom level who take advantage of welfare"
It's somewhat hard to take advantage of welfare given that most welfare today is gimped to the point of barely being enough to live on, or are welfare-to-work programs which bus people to work for long hours for bare bones assistance money. While there is tax evasion on the bottom it pales in comparison to tax evasion by the top 5% who have in excess of $5 Trillion stored in tax havens and tax shelters.
@A86 I was on welfare in 2005-2006 after a cumulative back injury left me hospitalized shortly after earning my master's degree, during which time I had had only one job, and that was temping. I received $73 biweekly AND was forced to spend 40 hours of my week at either Federal Employment Guidances Services or doing clerical work for a charity just to receive that. That amounts to 92 cents an hour, which is worse than slave labor, because I had no resources to pay for my housing.
@2010GOP FEGS would tell us that the charity might hire us, but every welfare recipient I know said the same thing: "They told me it's not in their budget to hire me." The only welfare fraud is at the top--it's a slave labor scam.
@A86 Historically, third and fourth parties have neve rlasted long, at most a decade, if I remember correctly. The Democrats are actually the oldest party in the US, the Republicans actually starting as a liberal off shoot of them. Then the party platforms switched sometime in the 20th century, where Democrats became liberals and vice versa.
Thing is, the Republican party is the result of the dissolution of the Whig party, where it filled the gap.
The emphasis, you dope, should be on the wasteful spending of the perpetual wars that cost this country a trillion dollars per year. Besides that, we have 900 military bases in 130 countries. No wonder were broke. Now quit sensationalizing the news and start reporting the real news. Your whole basis for this kind crap is you get paid everytime someone clicks on your site because of advertising purposes.
Anyone remember when it was considered PATRIOTIC for the rich to support their country in times of need? Remember when the top bracket was 96% for income taxes during ww2? Or in the 50's recession when the top bracket was 90%. There was a time that the rich and powerful understood to some extent that they had a greater responsibility to this country because of their greater power and influence and during times of war and economic downturn they would help get the country back on the right path
Lol at Cenk trying to make the Bush tax cuts a triple tax cut, the liberals squealed about it when it was passed first, then squealed in 2010 as if it was a new cut in what they were already paying, and now Cenk is acting like the rich are going to get "a gift" again.
The government taking less of the rich's money isn't a gift. Liberals don't own everyone's money and generously "give them it". They think they do. But they don't.
The rich pay too much. The poor/lowermidclass pay 0.
@Nick00105 - - You mean to tell me that's all your pathetic azz got??? Don't know any other words Nicky? I tell you what... You go try to read a book and get that vocabulary built up nice and strong and then you come back to try it again. It's ONLY for people that carries intelligence that ranks higher than a floor mop around here... okay baby boy? Let the grown intellects converse on the big people topics alright Lil Nicky??? Now you run along and play......
The poor and lower middle class families with children often really don't even pay payroll taxes, not to mention paying nothing in income tax. They have payroll tax deducted from their paychecks all year, but at tax time, they get back more from the IRS than they paid in. The poor/lower middle class families get refundable handouts from earned income credits, child tax credits, making work pay credits and education credits which often are more than anything they paid in payroll tax all year.
Eliminate all tax loopholes but have the rich pay the same rate as the poor and middle class. If you make 100 times more you should pay 100 times more, but nothing above that.
Right now, the poor contribute nothing to our government and get all the handouts from it, along with much of the lower middle class. The IRS even pays them money thru refundable tax credits when they pay nothing.
The poor and lower middle class must start paying something in income taxes now!
The way the American Government system is set up, Republicans get ALL the profits, the Democrats get ALL the blame, and the taxpayers get ALL the debt. Wonder who came up with an idea like that? Wonder who fell for it?
@davejsmith No, they don't. 99% of Americans work for small businesses. The rich just hoard all the fucking money for themselves, and buy a bunch of shit they don't need. Lower and Middle class Americans are far more likely to invest money and start new businesses.
@loqutor The super rich employ 1/3 of all americans.... many of these company's re-invest in America and pay politicians off with your support. The lower class/ middle class are part of the problem, they vote for these politicians that love stealing your money. Its wonderful, next time your at wallmart... your supporting the structure.
@davejsmith You think WAL-MART is helping the American economy?!!!
Congratulations, you have just proven yourself a complete and utter ignoramus. Wal-Mart has driven many small businesses out of business, and ruined the economies of countless cities across the country.
@loqutor do I think wal-mart is helping the American economy... did you read what I posted moron? Do you read? I didn't make wal-mart a rich company, you did.. the middle class... and I have invested in Wal-Mart and it has paid off.
@loqutor It is not just Walmart, it is many competing businesses that do this, Kmart, Earnst hardware, Pat N Pak, Home Depot, Lowes and many more. A business is not a charity, if you are not competitive, you will cease to be!
@willywaldo1 Got another one forya WW1 - It's not about the rich paying 4the poor. It's about the tax codes being skewed in order 2have the majority of this nation's wealth funneled to the TOP!! Nobody wants the rich folks money, we would just appreciate it if OUR hard earned money would STOP being given to them. The wealthy pulls in the majority of income because the system has been contorted that way for the past 30yrs. Once it's UNcontorted, The playing field would be leveled out once again.
PEOPLE, I tell u what. For all of u who aren't interested in politics because it's NOT sexy enough for you... For all of you who believe the RepubliCON party has your best interest at heart (even though they don't actually possess one) - and for all of you out there who feels that it's all going to work itself out on it's on w/o your input... Remember THIS - If THAT day comes that this country will truly be the land of only "HAVES AND HAVE-NOTS"... Don't cry when you find yourself a HAVE-NOT!!!
Have today's Republican politicians ever heard of the Laffer Curve?
beneathdatrees0 2 days ago
I wish the Democrats and Republicans would put their heads together and really think about what is good for America, especially for the lower and middle class and not their votes. Be party-less and come up with one plan together. Do they worry about their next pay check like I do? We are heading towards a crisis and yet we are still pretending that tomorrow will be okay. Hello? Do we even have a middle class society anymore? Maybe 3rd World Countries, India or China will give us some donations?
marlies4u 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm for the GOP. Give millionaires back exactly what they paid - with reasonable interest and not one cent more when it comes to Social Security, Medicare, VA, any government assistance. I watched a lady that inherited $2 million during her last 6 months of cancer. Medicare paid all her medical bills and she drew a SS check off her husband. She never worked or paid into the system. She died with $2 million dollars in the bank and with America in more debt than any time in history. Reform now!
vechorik 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thanks to liberal policies America can no longer afford to pay for medicare, social security, unemployment and many other services. We also need to lower the minimum wage to $2/hr in order to compete with China and bring jobs back home. Fiscally responsible conservatives like Paul Ryan and Michele Bachmann know this and are currently
working to end these wasteful handout programs and bring the minimum wage down so that America can be great again. God bless the GOP!
GOPkicksbutt 7 months ago
Rich people create jobs, Government creates red tape.
TumisHumis 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nick00105
and just for the simple fact that you think I'm dumb after seeing that video and reading what I posted... You're dumber.
cmosdriver 8 months ago
Comment removed
cmosdriver 8 months ago
whats the mystery? the "rich" folks who own your job need money for your paycheck and benefits. do you like having a job? less money means less jobs. more money means more jobs, thus increasing the economy. its basic economics and its easy to understand if you remove your useless emotional crap and prejudices. how did our society get so stupid, oh yah, we trusted the government to educate us. by the way, its the super ultra rich, like obama, who want to take money from job creators, why
audrea12345 8 months ago
@audrea12345 Greece had a similar idea, to tax the SHIT out of rich people. The rich people decided to leave, now look what happened to their jobs.
TumisHumis 8 months ago
@TumisHumis A. YOu clearly don't have a clue when it comes to macroeconomic theory or you would understand that tax policy had nothing to do with Greece's failures. B. Nobody is talking about "taxing the shit out of rich people". THe last time the top bracket had such low tax rates was 1950! We are just asking that we return to the Clinton rates that allowed us to see one of the largest and longest expansions in U.S. history. Rich people sure were leaving America in the 90's huh? LOL!!!!
durhamdf 6 months ago
First they came for the millionaires...
INatalkaI 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The ONLY way to bring jobs back to America is to lower the minimum wage to $2/hr.
This is the only way we can compete with China. Paul Ryan and my fellow republicans need to act on this now. Employers also should not have to carry the burdern of paying for health care either. Go get em Paul!
GOPkicksbutt 9 months ago
The top 10% of the US pay over 90% of the taxes as it is, 47% of the US pays no federal or state taxes, so why should the rich have to pay more taxes, this is America where its posible for anyone to prosper. what I dont get is how you Liberals think you can just sit on your butts being lazy and expect the rich to suport you. we are not supose to be a socialist government. I grew up poor as poor gets I work my butt off and make 120k a year (top 10%)so why should i have to pay for you?
slideride 10 months ago
@slideride You are assuming everyone who make less than you are somehow lazy. What we are talking about are middle class hardworking people just as you once were.
However the tax is not equal, not even close. We don't all pay the same % of taxes. The rich pays less % of taxes than people who are middle class or lower. If the income tax is the same % across the board, then it is fair since that is what income tax is about.
You think your tax actually supports the poor? Don't kid yourself.
Neosaigo 10 months ago
@slideride this is amerikkka and anyoen can prosper? this said about the same nation that have the biggest incarceration rate on the planet!
muffinman5323 8 months ago
@muffinman5323 It's because our police force is a police force, they don't sit inside all day and wait to break up riots like in greece, they're out there doing their jobs.
TumisHumis 8 months ago
@DeepSouth16 Also go look at the weighting in the budget per income level of necessities then substract it from the 100% you'll see that out of what's left of their budget taxes are far more important that those of the richer. Also take into account that most of the richer people's income is plus-value so you cut their tax rate by around 50% (their companies also receive subsidies...). You'll find it interesting how much tighter their budget is and how much harder it is with so little.
dadumbazz 10 months ago
@DeepSouth16 If someone really is ressourceful, he shouldn't be afraid to pay the same rates as everyone else.
I'll also give you a couple examples of people not worth their money : Any professionnal athletes over 1m, Paris hilton, George W Bush, Facebook, and the list goes on. I'm sure you can name a lot of undeserving ones and probably on the other side as well (friends/family that have the potential, but can't afford it).
Inventors are rarely the ones getting rich of their ideas.
dadumbazz 10 months ago
@DeepSouth16 I'm not talking about everyone of the rich, but the ones that are doing nothing new, intelligent, etc. You shouldn't be able to pay lower tax rates because you got there or were already there. What's the point in competition if you make sure the ones already at the top cannot get caught up by equally talented people and how people already at the top that are not worth their money should be allowed to stay there. Plus value is taxed at 50% of the 35% and that's what they live on.
dadumbazz 10 months ago
@DeepSouth16 Are you for the return of a monarchy (being born rich makes it impossible for you to fail and being born poor makes it impossible for you to succeed)? Cutting in social security means that even if you're talented an illness will take away all that you've made so far. Cutting in educations means you won't have the tools. Reducing taxes for the rich means that the wealth already in banks will never disappear even when you do absolutely nothing and get fat on the dividends...
dadumbazz 10 months ago
@dadumbazz There's also the fact that people that have planned for their retirement have included the old benifits when they were with a financial advisor. Let's also add that not everyone can work that late as they do physical work. You need to also know that they have more than their fair share of the current wealth especially when you think that ammongst them are : people already born right, by luck (facebook stolen idea and lucky that people went to his instead of others), criminals, etc.
dadumbazz 10 months ago
@DeepSouth16 thank you for clearing that up.it always helps to resort to name calling to show people how right you are.ill see you in church next week.treat others the way you would like to be treated.
rockhound362002 10 months ago
@DeepSouth16 Look your bigotry shows up what a shock typical bigot southerner.Still fighting the civil war you guys lost I see , and we both already know that most republicans are closet happy. Sorry to disappoint you but you can tell your wing nut buddies like larry craig, Lee, Mark foley, and all your evangelical wing nuts leaders that are always sleeping with young boys and male prostitutes lol that I don't swing that way,but I am pretty sure that you do.
Dblock7185 10 months ago
I'm a republican 100% tax the rich sounds like a very good idea to me they have made millions of dollars from exploiting the middle and lower class.like 3% of people control 95% of the money its time they give back some.they've bleed us for years its time they pay a little extra.Ive never voted for anyone but republicans but if they keep trying to stop tax the rich i will vote Democrat.I'm sick of making it easy on the rich.give the middle and lower class a break for once.
rockhound362002 10 months ago
@rockhound362002 Good man. Please tell your friends :)
strakha0 10 months ago
+NEVER VOTE FOR A REPUBLICAN AGAIN! The PAUL RYAN BUDGET PLAN will DESTROY MEDICARE for those of us 54 years or younger. IMAGINE being an old man & having to do BATTLE with a PRIVATEinsurance company BECAUSE THE voucher you got is not enough to pay for the coverage you need or you just can't get the coverage you need for your illness! REPUBLICONS slipped this into their budget proposal with NO DISCUSSION OR DEBATE! TELL YOUR STATE REPUBLICON$ THAT YOU WILL NEVER VOTE FOR A REPUBLICON AGAIN!
poindexterwitkowsky 10 months ago 16
@MrJeggus bigot much....
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@MrJeggus ... LOL... You sound so educated! Let me guess; Havard? Yale? Princeton? Joe's Car Wash? BINGO!!! I knew you was a racist! Stereotyping people by race, religion, sex, location is all the same. I can't help it if I allot smarter than you. Don't blame me, your DNA just sucks! LOL
aSingleDallasGuy 10 months ago
@MrJeggus ... So you are defending Obama, like I said. That says more about you than me. You mean the endless wars Obama has continued and even started a 3rd? Those? Oh the racist card! What took you so long? You liberals usually start out with racist since you certainly can't defend his policies. God forbid anyone disagrees with a black guy, as that can only mean you are a racist right? Nice try, but that attempt to silence my genius has failed! Keep up the 5th grade name calling! LOL
aSingleDallasGuy 10 months ago
@MrJeggus ... Well, maybe you ought to wake up and take a whiff of smelling salt because your hero has SPENT and SPENT and SPENT to the tune of doubling our national debt. Yes, as much as George Washington thru George Bush combined. How is that going? The economy is far worse off today than the day he took office and our debt is out of control. Your arguement is no longer a theory. It has been in action and is an obvious failure! And you defend it? What a moron!!!
aSingleDallasGuy 10 months ago
Which of the "great" GOP candidates do you support? Huckabee? Palin? Gingrich? Trump?? Bachmann?? The only semi-serious person you have is Romney, who has had to flipflop on every issue to appease the rednecks and religious fanatics. Sane, moderate conservatives like David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Colin Powell, etc. will probably once again be voting for Obama . . .
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed trying to make a point by calling people names is a huge failure.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
The real challenge is this: Explain why the rich need tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts went into effect in 2001. Where are the jobs they were supposed to create? All that's happened is that wealth has become more and more concentrated in the hands of the few while the middle class bears an unfair burden. Obama is right that the cuts need to expire in 2012.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed under the bush tax cuts, unemployment was reduced to 4-5 percent for years. That was the point where you guys were bitching about 200-300 billion in deficts per year, now you guys are all for 1500 billion or more a year. What changed? BTW if you striped the entire fortune from every rich person on the planet you couldn't pay for obamas spending.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname What changed, of course, is that the economy collapsed. Economists on both sides agreed the bailouts were necessary. We are still not at all "for" deficits and will work to eliminate them. Raising taxes on the wealthiest is just part of what needs to be done.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Economists on both sides DID NOT agree on the bailouts.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Not true. It was W's administration that started the bailouts. It was only when Obama became president that conservatives suddenly changed their tune for purely partisan reasons . . .
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Actualy the conservatives were against bushes bailouts as well. Your memory is very selective.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@sutircomed "Economists on both sides agreed the bailouts were necessary." That's not true at all, only keynsians really do. How else do you justify pumping tons of money into systems which failed in the past, rather then letting new ones emerge?
You'd have to cut almost everything and raise taxes massively on almost everyone to keep the government afloat. There's no evidence that that's going to happen, it's impossible the way the political system is set up.
Houshalter 10 months ago
The top 1% in the U.S. own 40% of the wealth. They should be paying more taxes, giving back to the country that has given them so much, and existing loopholes should be closed. The voodoo economics notion that low taxes for the rich = more jobs has been exploded (yet again) by the events of the last decade. Taxes for the rich are ultra-low, and unemployment is high. Even an idiot can see it isn't working. It's time to get serious again.
sutircomed 10 months ago 4
@sutircomed that's a false dichotomy. We do not have to either have corporatism or socialism with no other options. Instead simply stop government intervention which caused the problems in the first place. Then we can talk about wealth redistribution.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter You're the one who mentioned "socialism", not me. I said we should raise taxes on the rich. Under Republican President Eisenhower the top tax bracket was 91%, and those were very prosperous times. Wealth redistribution is already going on--taxpayer money funding a war based on lies (Iraq) and corporate welfare. It's time to redistribute in a way that helps the majority of people, not merchants of war and the rich.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed the rich never paid tax rates that high, they got out through loopholes. For the most part it burdened the upper middle class and "new money" so to prevent competetion with the super rich. Also, where else were businesses supposed to go at that time? Most of the world was recovering from WWII, under communism, or in the third world. The US had a huge advantage, and government spending and debt were also much lower.
Houshalter 10 months ago
Marx was right about some things, religion being one.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Which resulted in purges, slaughters and genocide. Marxism is the most prolific killer in history.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname "purges, slaughters and genocide" -- Christians have done these things too. Check out the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the conquest of the New World. You also cannot blame Marx for the actions of Stalin and Mao. Mind you, I'm no Marxist, but it's clear Marx did not intend his ideas to be used to create totalitarian states.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed I do blame marx for those actions because it is his system that led to it and has always led to it in every single case it has been tried. The 2 biggest tyrants in the 20th century, Mao and Stalin both were marxists
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Hitler was a capitalist. Does that mean Adam Smith was evil?
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Hitler was a facist, not a captialist. Captialism doesn't allow for government control of industry like nazism does.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Hitler said: “I absolutely insist on protecting private property ... we must encourage private initiative." Both fascism and capitalism are more flexible than you portray them, and Nazism was definitely capitalist; in fact, fascists have often advocated what they call "heroic capitalism" or "super-capitalism."
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Seriously, are you trying to tell me that hitlers WORDS should be believed???? His actions show that he took over industry and squashed captialism.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Not that it truly matters in the context of the current budget situation, but, yes, Nazism was both corporatist and capitalistic. What matters right now is that the American middle class doesn't get ground into dust so that the fat cats can become fatter still.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Nazism was about state control and racial purity.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@sutircomed “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” - Mussolini
FAIL, corporatism is inherently anti-capitalism, anti-free-market, etc.
You know who Ron Paul is, right?
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter Interesting how you take dictators words at face value.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname read the quote I was replying to.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@sutircomed Lets try another tack, name the successfull nation based on marxism.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname No one here is arguing for Marxism, so this is a pointless exercise. I might as well ask you to name a successful country based on Nazism.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Actualy there are people here arguing for marxism.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
obamas plan? rasie taxes by 4 trillion over 12 yeaqrs cutting the defict by 333 billion per year while the deficit remains above 1 trillion a year. Face it, this hate fest about the rich doesn't even come close to addressing the defict. it is effectively a drop in the bucket.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
My point in posting that quotation actually had to do with the absolute stupendous hypocrisy of the GOP . . .
The religious right actually serves only the worldly interests of the plutocracy.
And who else, besides the GOP, would attempt to gut the Clean Air Act under the banner of "pro-life" (i.e., anti-choice) policies?
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed someone who understands that the clean air act is driving industry overseas?
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname People's lives are far more important than dirty fuel profits. The answer is investing in clean energy.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Clean energy that costs more, reducing americas standard of living and making everything cost more. It effects everyone.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Pollution and global warming are already affecting us. It's time that we look toward the future, not simply stay stuck with the status quo -- dirty air, oil spills, and foreign wars to protect our "interests." Also, your claim about a lower standard of living is false. The development of new energy sources will create huge numbers of jobs.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed That may be true about the jobs but it proves my point about increased prices because those jobs will have to be paid for. Global warming? What global warming?
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname Ah, so you are a science denier. 2010 was the warmest year on record. All ten of the warmest years on record have occurred since 1998. My advice is pay attention to NASA not to the Koch bros.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Who are the koch brothers? How far does the record go back? To 1970 maybe???
I listen to science that isn't fudged and fixed to give a desired result.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname The Koch bros are extremely rich oilmen who have spent $55 million+ funding anti-science groups. Detailed climate records exist since the 1850s.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed 1850's for the entire palnet? LOL even the parts nobody had been to yet?? Since when is qestioning a scientific theory "anti-science"??? Thats part of the scientific method for gods sake.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@mrfrednoname "The period for which reasonably reliable instrumental records of near-surface temperature exist with quasi-global coverage is generally considered to begin around 1850."--Wikipedia (Even Hawaii had been discovered by 1778 . . .)
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed Even in antartica? Which was first visited when???
Even if i took your date as fact, which it isn't, you have a record of part of the earth, for 160 years of at least 4,000,000,000 years.
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@sutircomed "new energy sources will create huge numbers of jobs." Paying people to dig ditches and fill them back up will create huge numbers of jobs as well. The number of jobs is not the goal or a metric of success of an economy. If it wasn't for minimum wage, almost everyone could have a job if they wanted one anyways. Without fiat currency, the purchasing power of wages and saved money would also rise over time also.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter This is a poor argument for maintaining the status quo of dirty air, oil spills, and foreign wars. Clean energy is providing a larger percentage of global energy needs every year, and it is a sector that will continue to grow.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed of course it will, it's inevitable. It doesn't mean it needs artificial taxpayer support to prop it up, and if it does, it shouldn't be done at all. At the moment alternative energy sources are practical for alot more purposes then the used to be, but for most things the cost/benefit simply isn't good enough.
Houshalter 10 months ago
@Houshalter The U.S. needs to take the lead in developing alternative energy sources so that we don't get left behind in the future. Most taxpayer support right now still subsidizes fossil fuels. That needs to change.
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed yes, except I have yet to see an environmentalist against our ridiculous state-run infrastructure which is basically a giant subsidy for oil and car companies. The future of oil is also really hard to predict. If you knew with a good deal of certainty what the future supply and demand would be, you could buy it up oil now and sell it later at great profit, also driving up the price now and lowering it later so to smooth the transition.
Houshalter 10 months ago
"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."--Jesus
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed
You are forgetting that the only god the wealthy worship is Money, they use religion to keep the rest under control.
8lig 10 months ago
@8lig Why do you imagine I "forgot" that?
"Religion is the opiate of the masses."--Karl Marx
sutircomed 10 months ago
@sutircomed because marcism worked out so well whenever it has been tried....
mrfrednoname 10 months ago
@edeal86 What people are misled by is the reporters who instead of reporting the year-to-year changes in tax rates, -report on the tax laws themselves which were patched from the laws passed during the "Bush Tax Cuts", which were cutting the rates from laws from 13 years ago, so when the reporters say Republicans are trying to "give tax cuts to the rich", they are referring to extending tax cuts relative to rates 13 years ago, which has absolutely nothing to do with changing the current rates.
gilbet 10 months ago
@gilbet I actually have a list of the tax rate history, and the tax's were lowered when Bush was elected into office. So no, this is applying to the current tax rates. Not the rates of the 1990's which were way more beneficial to our economy.
edeal86 10 months ago
What people are misled by is the reporters who instead of reporting the year-to-year changes in tax rates, they report on the tax laws themselves which were patched from the laws passed during the "Bush Tax Cuts", which were cutting the rates from laws from 13 years ago.
So when the reporters say Republicans are trying to "give tax cuts to the rich", they are referring to extending tax cuts relative to rates from 13 years ago, which has absolutely nothing to do with changing the current rates.
gilbet 10 months ago
This is class warfare.
There needs to be an incentive for the "rich" side to contribute to the country; and that's the part of the warfare the middle class is loosing out on.
You don't win a war being timid, and trade embargo take lifetimes to produce results (ask Cuba) so we cant even boycott business effectively.
It will take a radical reaction to change the action.....
Razorlust 10 months ago
2010GOP getting his ass handed to him on here again......imagine that.
daguzify 10 months ago
@shellymathonson Ah, thank you! :)
ConservateEliberat0r 10 months ago
Such simple economics could be applied but here in america that's a stretch. Simple taxation depending on your gross income and current wealth (so of course the wealthier will be taxed more and I sure won't loose any sleep over that) and we need to enact a simple 'cost of living wage increase'. At this rate their will be no middle class and we'll be just another third world country. If there's ever been a time for revolution- it's now...
mrselfdestruct23 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeepSouth16 "WE EARNED IT, WE SHOULD KEEP IT"
Define "earned it." With you earned the money from the sweat off your brow then you have a point, but what is usually being discussed here are the top 10% of income earners who hold nearly 90% of the nation's wealth.
How did they "earn" that? Tax breaks, tax subsidies, hiring overseas labor, cutting safety costs, etc. - a lot on the backs of the working men and women who do much more to actually earn their money.
RememberJudas314 10 months ago
No surprises here. He is doing the job his owners bought him to do.
Richardisdorky 10 months ago
This is insane, Western europe has tax cuts exceeding 52% for personal incomeof about USD 75,000.- and up. how on earth the US can continue to accept these ridiculous levels of personal income tax is beyond me.
faithisfiction 10 months ago
@357lenny Yes, the last administration followed the constitution very closely.
ChristlicherKrieger3 10 months ago
If poor people could learn to stop shitting out children like demented rabbits then they maybe they wouldn't be so poor. Every notice how the richer parts of the world limit themselves? That's why they stay rich and the morons stay poor so don't expect them to pay for you little porch monkeys because you haven't learnt to use a condom.
Silkie341 10 months ago
@Silkie341 If too many kids are really the reason why people are so poor, why are so many Republicans against Planned Parenthood. Better yet, what about those who are already poor and WITHOUT children? I like your idea of the world, where the only reason anyone is poor, is because of too many kid and not loans, medical bills, getting sacked from their job as 'cost-reduction' and such.
ZoneofZay 10 months ago
@Silkie341 Cool story bro.
CHAOSoriginal 10 months ago
@Silkie341 Okay first of all, most people use Birth Control and Condoms but something you may not know about Condoms and Birth Control they aren't 100% effective. Condoms are 97% effective, meaning there is a 3% chance you could get pregnant. With Birth Control the pill is 99.99% effective, with a .01% possibility of getting pregnant it happens. I have 3 family members, 1 of which can tell you what Contraceptive method she was on each time that method failed.
breemystic 10 months ago
EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD TAX THE RICH 95%
xMachineGhostsx 10 months ago
GE actually got money back from there tax
detriotballer2 10 months ago
Every time that you blame the problem on a democrat of a republican you make yourself into a fool. Different cheeks, same ass.
400constantine 10 months ago
Cool anti Liberal & OBAMA, T-Shirts and Gear @ controversyandchaosDOTcom
tobasco101 10 months ago
Rob rich people. That would be the great equalizer.
ConservateEliberat0r 10 months ago
rich ppl are evil! and i am a dumbass! if the govenment only did what the constitution said then they couldnt spend all the money coming in at a further reduced tax rate. if u hate rich ppl based on the fact that they are rich. you are a bigot and a evious pawn that has been twisted by lust for things you have not achived!
arkmade 10 months ago
More divide and conquer nonsense. It's like lala land when these douche bags pretend that taxing the rich is the only answer. News flash, you can take all their money and it's not enough for the progressive agenda. It's never enough.
Idea. Eliminate all INCOME tax. Replace it with consumption tax. Progressives get what they want. As much tax revenue as the economy can produce. Rich people buy more, they pay more tax.
cooperbry 10 months ago
@cooperbry The problem is that the rich aren't constantly spending, and that is the major assumption of trickle down theory. Plus, given the amount of middle men involved, the amount that trickles down is trivial. Far better to give tax cuts to the lower classes, who spend money much more often, and with fewer middle men, the amount that trickles down, or I suppose up in this case, is far from trivial.
halo07guy2 10 months ago 2
@halo07guy2 The fallacy with that thinking is that spending is the only activity in the economy that matters. Savings is equally if not more important an activity as spending.
cooperbry 10 months ago
@cooperbry True. But spending is what creates income. The main idea behind trickle down is that the rich we'll spend much more than the average man, and do so repeatedly. In reality, it is not constant, whereas spending by the lower classes is pretty much constant, given their large numbers.
If you have one rich person spending money, and 100 average people, who is going to create more income, given that they each purchase once and at the same place?
halo07guy2 10 months ago
@halo07guy2 "spending is what creates income." Really? Then why doesn't the government just print off hundred dollar bills and hand them out for people to spend? We'd be generating income. We wouldn't need rich people to hire anyone for jobs since everyone would be earning more than enough income to provide for themselves.
TehBANN3D 10 months ago
@TehBANN3D Because printing money like that leads to inflation. The rich aren't the ones that create jobs. It's the middle and lower classes, who spend much more money more frequently, unless said rich person decides to buy a $120,000 yacht every other day.
The cumulative spending of the lower classes is greater than that of the rich. You can say they invest, but where do they invest? Overseas, in which case their money is going overseas, not here.
halo07guy2 10 months ago
@halo07guy2 And what's wrong with inflation? If anything, it would entice people to spend more since in the long term all cash savings will be worth less. This means immediate income will increase, since spending = income.
And most wealthy people do not hold massive amounts of cash assets. They invest it in property, stock, bonds, commodities, things that actually yield some sort of output.
TehBANN3D 10 months ago
@halo07guy2 Spending creates income? No. Spending creates an economy, but the economy offers nothing to the federal budget. In fact, corporations don't pay taxes. Your explanation would be best suited towards helping a struggling economy rather then fixing a deficit.
insaneapples 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TIME IS OVER.IT WOULD START 1994,NOSTRADAMUS SAID BET.7 AND 20 YRS.1994 PLUS 7,SEPT.2001, NEW YORK’S TWIN TOWER.THE KING OF TERROR WOULD ENTER EUROPE.OSAMA WAS GIVEN CITIZENSHIP IN BOSNIA,SOUTHERN EUROPE IN 1993..NEWS TODAY:MID.EAST UPRISING,AL QAEDA IN LIBYA..FAMINE,PESTILENCE,EARTH¬QUAKES EVERYWHERE.TO NON BELIEVERS REPENT SAVE YOUR SOULS AND PRAY FOR OTHERS.JESUS IS COMING,RAPTURE IS COMING!LISTEN TO PROPHET OWUOR WHO MADE THE RAIN FALL.type in dr owuor rain AND PAUL BEGLEY IN YOUTUBE.
manforever15 10 months ago
I hate how the GOP and dems protect the corporations that don't need any help. :/ How am I going to get a job if the jobs move and there is no money here for people to start small businesses? All the Repubs. think they can get something out of nothing.
restlesspride666 10 months ago
@cloogerdude Rofl.
restlesspride666 10 months ago
The sad thing is that Ryan's budget proposal is not enough. We need to slash taxes on everyone and drastically cut spending. Rand Paul is the only one that gets it and neither party is giving him the time of day.
Also, I am against both corporate and social welfare.
satarnag 10 months ago
@satarnag You've fallen for a Trojan Horse.
restlesspride666 10 months ago
@restlesspride666 We'll see how he does. So far I am impressed with what he is doing.
satarnag 10 months ago
@satarnag Ron Paul is an asscIown. He's been in D.C for 30 yrs and accomplished nada
Fatuous prattle... just like Pauls putrid worldview.
rocky19421 10 months ago
@rocky19421 I was talking about Rand Paul, but since you brought it up, Ron Paul has been consistent (except for his illegal alien stance) for 30 years. When you zombies stop watching American Idol and stop gawking over the Royal wedding, maybe you'll pull your head out of your ass to see what is exactly going on. So far, I see Cenk as a puppet or just plain ignorant. Either case, I am not impressed with his "insights".
satarnag 10 months ago
@satarnag Nice to meet you I'm Rand Paul. Oh You have'nt, Well Maybe you've heard of my father Ron Paul. Fishsticks? No Mrs paul is not my mom. Oh I know that they are crispy and delicious. No my father is the one who ran for President. No I'm not joking. Really he was in a debate and everything. Well about 6% of republicans. I might run too? No I won't be giving out free coupons for fishstick.
rocky19421 10 months ago
Cant remember the last time a poor man gave me a job.
MrFrank440 10 months ago
@MrFrank440 - If it weren't for these poor people there would be no jobs to work. Business owners don't create shit for nothing. Someone has to buy it. Demand creates jobs, not rich people.
A86 10 months ago
@A86 Whats wrong with being wealthy? Im not-but would like to be. Not going to happen for me. When I was your age this was a very different country. Do you see a problem with our mounting debt? Im finding it more difficult to survive. Wish there was a 3rd party. Peace
MrFrank440 10 months ago
@MrFrank440 - It becomes a bad thing when wealth comes from exploitation, corruption and undue/undeserved power.
The mounting debt does indeed worry me and IMO a lot of Americans aren't serious about solving it because a lot of Americans still aren't willing to face what's causing it. The biggest culprit being: our Empire. I wish there was a third party too and I wish people would get serious.
A86 10 months ago
@A86 Thanks for being civil. Got to go for now.
MrFrank440 10 months ago
@A86: The vast majority of corporations are not involved in exploitation, corruption, etc. Why does the left always lump all corporations into one category? That's asinine.
There are FAR MORE on the bottom level who take advantage of welfare, etc.
You're right about one thing. "Most" don't care about the debt/spending. They have the mind-set that "someone else" will pay for it, though we know they're sadly mistaken. And sorry ~ but this seems to be typical of many Liberals.
2010GOP 10 months ago
@2010GOP Typical screwing of facts.
restlesspride666 10 months ago
@restlesspride666 GOP wants lower tax rates for the rich = LESS revenue = MORE gov't debt and tries to decrease spending by going after programs that help the poor and low income people. Is that what Jesus would do?
SuperShockjock 10 months ago
@2010GOP - The statutory corporate tax rate in the US is up to 39%. The effective tax rate of your average corporation is around 20%. A lot of corporations pay no taxes at all. Of all taxes combined the bottom 90% pay around 60%+ of the taxes while the top 10% pay less than 40% of the taxes despite owning around 70% of the nation's wealth.
Let's not even get into how many trillions of taxpayer money has gone into subsidies, tax breaks, tax credits, etc. for the rich despite outsourcing.
A86 10 months ago 21
@A86 What are you sources on those numbers? From what I've seen I'm sure they're correct, but I'd like to make certain for myself.
AsifIcarebear3 10 months ago
@AsifIcarebear3 - One of the main sources is a recent report from the CBO and the IRS:
(.) caivn (.) org / article / 2010 / 06 / 24 / middle - class - tax - burden - increases - amt - continues - escape - reform
Several GAO reports reported the amazing lack of payment of corporate, dividend and capital gains taxes.
A86 10 months ago
@2010GOP - "There are FAR MORE on the bottom level who take advantage of welfare"
It's somewhat hard to take advantage of welfare given that most welfare today is gimped to the point of barely being enough to live on, or are welfare-to-work programs which bus people to work for long hours for bare bones assistance money. While there is tax evasion on the bottom it pales in comparison to tax evasion by the top 5% who have in excess of $5 Trillion stored in tax havens and tax shelters.
A86 10 months ago 10
@A86 I was on welfare in 2005-2006 after a cumulative back injury left me hospitalized shortly after earning my master's degree, during which time I had had only one job, and that was temping. I received $73 biweekly AND was forced to spend 40 hours of my week at either Federal Employment Guidances Services or doing clerical work for a charity just to receive that. That amounts to 92 cents an hour, which is worse than slave labor, because I had no resources to pay for my housing.
scottandrewhutchins 10 months ago
@2010GOP FEGS would tell us that the charity might hire us, but every welfare recipient I know said the same thing: "They told me it's not in their budget to hire me." The only welfare fraud is at the top--it's a slave labor scam.
scottandrewhutchins 10 months ago
@A86 Historically, third and fourth parties have neve rlasted long, at most a decade, if I remember correctly. The Democrats are actually the oldest party in the US, the Republicans actually starting as a liberal off shoot of them. Then the party platforms switched sometime in the 20th century, where Democrats became liberals and vice versa.
Thing is, the Republican party is the result of the dissolution of the Whig party, where it filled the gap.
halo07guy2 10 months ago
This is'nt nothing new.
58fenix 10 months ago
Class warfare. Divide and conquer.
The emphasis, you dope, should be on the wasteful spending of the perpetual wars that cost this country a trillion dollars per year. Besides that, we have 900 military bases in 130 countries. No wonder were broke. Now quit sensationalizing the news and start reporting the real news. Your whole basis for this kind crap is you get paid everytime someone clicks on your site because of advertising purposes.
czubspenx 10 months ago
This is new?
willdrake1 10 months ago
Anyone remember when it was considered PATRIOTIC for the rich to support their country in times of need? Remember when the top bracket was 96% for income taxes during ww2? Or in the 50's recession when the top bracket was 90%. There was a time that the rich and powerful understood to some extent that they had a greater responsibility to this country because of their greater power and influence and during times of war and economic downturn they would help get the country back on the right path
durhamdf 10 months ago
Paul Ryan kinda looks like the leprechaun from the Leprechaun horror films....just sayiin
ZingZee123456789 10 months ago
Gotta buy more ammo this week.
600joe 10 months ago
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes..."
-Leona Helmsley
The wealthy put money above everything else, EVERYTHING.
8lig 10 months ago
@8lig So do the dependents clamoring for handouts.
okefixico 10 months ago
@okefixico
Yep, the dependent children of the wealthy depend on handouts their entire lives.
The become irritated when they have to wait for their inheritance.
8lig 10 months ago
Lol at Cenk trying to make the Bush tax cuts a triple tax cut, the liberals squealed about it when it was passed first, then squealed in 2010 as if it was a new cut in what they were already paying, and now Cenk is acting like the rich are going to get "a gift" again.
The government taking less of the rich's money isn't a gift. Liberals don't own everyone's money and generously "give them it". They think they do. But they don't.
The rich pay too much. The poor/lowermidclass pay 0.
RuflessRecords 10 months ago
@Nick00105 - - You mean to tell me that's all your pathetic azz got??? Don't know any other words Nicky? I tell you what... You go try to read a book and get that vocabulary built up nice and strong and then you come back to try it again. It's ONLY for people that carries intelligence that ranks higher than a floor mop around here... okay baby boy? Let the grown intellects converse on the big people topics alright Lil Nicky??? Now you run along and play......
cmosdriver 10 months ago
The poor and lower middle class families with children often really don't even pay payroll taxes, not to mention paying nothing in income tax. They have payroll tax deducted from their paychecks all year, but at tax time, they get back more from the IRS than they paid in. The poor/lower middle class families get refundable handouts from earned income credits, child tax credits, making work pay credits and education credits which often are more than anything they paid in payroll tax all year.
RuflessRecords 10 months ago
This whole media dog and pony show has been a diversion. We're broke, and $38B is not going to fix it!
watch?v=Wozi20KhhVo
InformedTexasVoter 10 months ago
Eliminate all tax loopholes but have the rich pay the same rate as the poor and middle class. If you make 100 times more you should pay 100 times more, but nothing above that.
Right now, the poor contribute nothing to our government and get all the handouts from it, along with much of the lower middle class. The IRS even pays them money thru refundable tax credits when they pay nothing.
The poor and lower middle class must start paying something in income taxes now!
RuflessRecords 10 months ago
Most democrats are marxists, whereas most republicans are mere socialists. You people are too stupid to comprehend that fact.
obamaisaturd 10 months ago
*winning*
sydney12123 10 months ago
rich ppl suck chode ):
the8888 10 months ago
@357lenny How is it a regime?
ChristlicherKrieger3 10 months ago
Facism in the disguise of Republicans. I think the Republicans are dropping the disguises and showing what they truly represent.
rocky19421 10 months ago
The way the American Government system is set up, Republicans get ALL the profits, the Democrats get ALL the blame, and the taxpayers get ALL the debt. Wonder who came up with an idea like that? Wonder who fell for it?
rocky19421 10 months ago 3
I agree with the tax cuts to the rich. The rich provide jobs and carry the country.
davejsmith 10 months ago
@davejsmith No, they don't. 99% of Americans work for small businesses. The rich just hoard all the fucking money for themselves, and buy a bunch of shit they don't need. Lower and Middle class Americans are far more likely to invest money and start new businesses.
loqutor 10 months ago
@loqutor The super rich employ 1/3 of all americans.... many of these company's re-invest in America and pay politicians off with your support. The lower class/ middle class are part of the problem, they vote for these politicians that love stealing your money. Its wonderful, next time your at wallmart... your supporting the structure.
davejsmith 10 months ago
@davejsmith You think WAL-MART is helping the American economy?!!!
Congratulations, you have just proven yourself a complete and utter ignoramus. Wal-Mart has driven many small businesses out of business, and ruined the economies of countless cities across the country.
loqutor 10 months ago
@loqutor Not only Walmart, but also Home Depot, Lowes, Target, and so on.
mordred612 10 months ago
@loqutor do I think wal-mart is helping the American economy... did you read what I posted moron? Do you read? I didn't make wal-mart a rich company, you did.. the middle class... and I have invested in Wal-Mart and it has paid off.
davejsmith 10 months ago
@loqutor It is not just Walmart, it is many competing businesses that do this, Kmart, Earnst hardware, Pat N Pak, Home Depot, Lowes and many more. A business is not a charity, if you are not competitive, you will cease to be!
stetsonwalker 10 months ago
@willywaldo1 Got another one forya WW1 - It's not about the rich paying 4the poor. It's about the tax codes being skewed in order 2have the majority of this nation's wealth funneled to the TOP!! Nobody wants the rich folks money, we would just appreciate it if OUR hard earned money would STOP being given to them. The wealthy pulls in the majority of income because the system has been contorted that way for the past 30yrs. Once it's UNcontorted, The playing field would be leveled out once again.
cmosdriver 10 months ago
PEOPLE, I tell u what. For all of u who aren't interested in politics because it's NOT sexy enough for you... For all of you who believe the RepubliCON party has your best interest at heart (even though they don't actually possess one) - and for all of you out there who feels that it's all going to work itself out on it's on w/o your input... Remember THIS - If THAT day comes that this country will truly be the land of only "HAVES AND HAVE-NOTS"... Don't cry when you find yourself a HAVE-NOT!!!
cmosdriver 10 months ago
@cmosdriver ur dumb