Mark Levine on Bill O'Reilly debates Laura Ingraham and Stuart Varney on taxing the rich

[weseyedwalk]

Mark is dancing and evading the points made here, he tries to divert in desperation to win an argument and support the liberal agenda. 

[leolasi]

@weseyedwalk what points were made? And what was the argument? All I saw were three clowns making a string of unrelated assertions. Nothing said helped me to understand the issue.

[weseyedwalk]

@leolasi The issue is if you strangle the job makers by taxing them more for Obama care, then jobs will continue to disappear as a result. Mark is sidestepping by saying that the rich pay a smaller percentage of their income toward S.S. tax, that is because social security tax is not as progressive. It's just like me getting punished for working overtime, when I thought my check would be bigger, is was not much of a difference because I was taxed much more for my extra hard work-Fair? No way.

[leolasi]

@weseyedwalk I thought he was just saying "go back to Clinton years" and there were other tax concessions rich get, that poor don't. But anyway, I agree, poor people should pay more taxes, because they smoke and drink more, and get obese on cheap fatty foods, which requires more health care. If poor people bought expensive boutique foods, they wouldn't have money for cigarettes, alcohol and pizza. Rich people should be taxed less, if only as reward for spending money on the right things.

[weseyedwalk]

@4:15 that's not regressive tax, that is fair tax, does a rich man get sick more than a poor person? No. Then why should they pay more?

[t1ngley]

The rich only got that way by getting money, collectively, from the non-rich. When regular people pay their rent, it goes to some rich property owner. When regular people buy services from a business or corporation, it goes to some rich business owner or rich corporate stockholders. That’s oversimplified but still accurately illustrates the upward flow of money. I find it cold-heartedly ironic when the rich complain about giving back to the people who enabled their success in the first place.

[weseyedwalk]

@t1ngley I agree with you about rent being to high, but the problem is trickle up economics, means you take what is at the bottom poorness and spread that upward. Instead of trickle down economics which is spreading what is at the top wealth to the rest by creating jobs and being able to afford to pay workers well in a strong economy.

[TheHolyRoses]

bush hole.

[Samshile]

@john. they worked long hours for it. it is not yours to decide. Hard to not take by force, what does not belong to you. How i do charity is none of your business. We all only get one vote each. How many days a week should one have to work for government?

[bluedemon245]

The rich should pay more taxes so those who's motto is feed,breed and don't succeed can carry on.

[embryo923]

Thats right you fat rich pigs, pay up!

[JohnNoZ35]

Oh, my heart bleeds for the millionaires out there. That upper 1% that pays 40% of the taxes (though they own 70% of the wealth). Ah, forgot to mention that last part.

[shaggy2Lance]

When did Mark Levin get hair?

[klowety]

I wish people on the right would explain to Progressives why the rich pay less in social security. The reason is SS stops at $86,000, because that is the maximum anyone can receive.

[timmunozlasvegas]

@klowety That's a great point. Therefore, it would be more then fair to all. 

[norcallogger]

based on obama if someone makes at or over 250,000 they can afford more taxes

but beacuse someone makes less than that they should pay less

does that mean that someone who makes at or over 250,000 should pay more for gas or milk does that mean when obama goes to the store he should pay $10.00 for a gallon of milk beacuse he can afford it

[58tkdmike]

DAAAAMN bill is an old man these days - stupid old fool

[amindbody]

thanks for sharing.

why didn't republicans, when they had a majority, institute a no tax presidency?

libertarianism is the way to go.