Senator Rubio: I'd Expect Obama's "Class Warfare" Rhetoric From A 3rd World Leader

[logansGT]

A middle class person supporting Obama is like a chicken supporting Colonel Sanders.

[paulcoonan]

Tax increases on the rich will have no effect whatsoever. He could raise the bracket to 100% and nothing would change. It is the loopholes, credits, tax havens, and foundations that need the reform as those are the real reasons they pay less. Even if he could get more taxes out of the rich, it would eliminate what is left of the middle class because, "fees" would get handed down to consumers. Consumers have nobody to dump on, we are the dumping ground. Class warfare? You bet it's coming.

[cervantessssssssssss]

What Republicans are saying basically is, don't take money from the corporations, they line our pockets and buy our elections!

[shotsky94]

he's very eloquent

[xaviqaz]

Class warfare demagoguery. More taxes on the rich would not considerably fix the budget issue and could kill jobs in sectors like business jets and general aviation (60% made in USA). Cut defense.

[freddiemiles]

This dude is such a fraud.

[mueygringo]

Senator Rubio has reduced President Obama down to the least common denominator. If you lefties haven't realized Obama is a zero.

[tanio12]

@mueygringo

yeah with a bunch of damn nonsense talk now get to the solution.

[mueygringo]

@tanio12 What is the Obama plan?

[msfarm2]

PLEASE RUN FOR POTUS.... PLEASE!!

[micsc50]

Obama and his democRAT cronies are communist first and foremost. They think raising taxes while they spend like crazy will solve the problem. It won't they have to stop spending and buying votes with tax dollars.

[matthew1722]

@micsc50 I'm no fan of Obama, but it would be more accurate to call him a corporatist in the tradition of Benito Mussolini, he's no communist.

[micsc50]

@matthew1722 He is Obongo from the Congo.

[tanio12]

@matthew1722

hell what do dumbasses think congress is for the people? surely people in this country couldn't be that stupid. just ask the lobbyists who runs the show.

[matthew1722]

@tanio12 Ok, do you have a point other than it's "lobbyists who runs the show." Lobbyists are only intermediaries; it's financiers who largely run the show.

[freeworldtelevision]

Marc Rubio for President!!

[jonservative]

I hope whoever wins the 2012 nominations for republican president chooses mister rubio

[amitbarfs]

"class warfare" to a rethug is a poor person wanting a living wage.

[BulboLives]

Obama says we are all supposed to give our 'fair share'. What are the non-taxpayers supposed to give as their 'fair share'? I would suggest they start by cleaning streets, graffiti, public toilets, etc.

[kmg501]

Rubio is a BIG disappointed. He has turned into a massive war hawk when the nation can not at all afford it. We have between 23% to 30% unemployment as per John Williams analytical work or John Russo's labor studies.

Rubio tuned into an establishment Republican faster than a ice cream cone melts on a hot summer day.

-

[russellmcgaffin]

@kmg501 What does this have to do with the economy and the president's direction? Posts are here for expression and you can express whatever you want, but why talk about war when the subject of the video

is the economy?

[matthew1722]

Class conflict and conciousness has existed in this country even while we were still English colonies. All you have to do is reference our founding documents, and this will become evident. One of the arguments of the anti-federalists agaist the constitution on the question of representation was a concern that all the senators and reps. would be drawn from an aristocracy or oligarchy, and the "middling classes" of Americans would not enjoy adequate representation.

[russellmcgaffin]

@matthew1722 Representation of the people was thwarted with the 17th amendment. Originally the constitution said that the states would appoint senators from the state legislature. The 17th amendment changed it to popular elections for senators. When the states appoint their senators they can guarantee that their state will be represented more closely to what the people want. State legislatures have a better handle of what the people want because they were elected by those local people.

[matthew1722]

@russellmcgaffin Having state legislators elect senators puts another barrier between the senator and the source of his/her power, making it easier for wealthy oligarchs to manipulate the electoral process. Anyway, representation in the states as well as the federal legislature is in a precarious state since less than half the eligible voting public even votes in these elections. I just don't see danger to our liberty arising from this quarter. I would be more concerned with the unelected FED.

[russellmcgaffin]

@matthew1722 The founding fathers originally designed the process to be the house of reps are popularly elected & so are the state legislatures. Then the state legislature picks the 2 senators to represent the state. That's where the balance would be. The senate is to prevent the politicizing that's going on right now. This was the balance required for stable government. What's happening right now is that the senators all about being re-elected by the popular vote instead of doing their job

[matthew1722]

@russell To say that the founding fathers had a homogenous party line on this matter is completely fallacious. The founders varied in their opinions on this matter, and many had very different things in mind. But it's fantastic to assume that the current politicization is a result of this. This politicization has economic and class causes, which Senator Rubio would rather pretend do not exist. The problem is too many senators are in the pockets of the finance oligarchs.

[yadig2012]

Maro Rubio*2020 ?

[USA4July1776]

No kidding... we have a third world tyrant for a president and a banana republic-style leftist politicians... just look at the Congressional Black Caucus promoting communism and communist dictators.

Who needs enemies when we have leftists?

[tanio12]

@USA4July1776

oh boy here we go with a bunch of nonsense talk can somebody come up with a real solution that doesn't involve stupid ass labels such as communism,socialism, leftist, tyrant conservative,can we get a real solution.

[macarion]

So, this guy doesn't believe in taxes?

[terskip]

@macarion I can't tell if your too ignorant to understand what he said or understood it fully and are too dishonest to acknowledge any proper criticism.

Or just a troll...

[macarion]

@terskip He's implying that it's "class warfare" and un-American to take taxes from higher income people and use that to pay for stuff that lower income people use. We already do that. We've been doing it for a long time.

[ztSHOCK]

@macarion The question is whether it is right to take money from somebody and give it to somebody else.

Did those rich people take that money by force? Did they steal it from someone else? If so, then they should be forced to give it back. If they didn't take it by force or theft, why should that wealth be taken from them?

[macarion]

@ztSHOCK Right, so you and Sen. Rubio are opposed to all taxes.

[macarion]

@ztSHOCK So you're opposed to all taxes?

[MarkG45]

@ztSHOCK There are corrupt tax loopholes in the current law that companies with high paying lawyers can discover. GE paid 0 dollars in taxes last year. Does 0% sound reasonable to you?

The tax increases comes from simply closing loopholes. The Republicans are against stopping the scamming of our tax code because __________ .

You tell me. Remember when Democrats tried to pay for 9/11 health insurance by preventing companies from claiming tax standing in the Caribbean? It was filibustered.

[ztSHOCK]

@MarkG45

There should be no corporate taxes whatsoever. Businesses treat taxes like any other expense, and taxes are a blanket expense that affects every business in every industry. That means all businesses pay taxes by either raising prices, cutting salaries or laying off workers, or taking less of a profit (bad for shareholders and investors). The tax is still taken from us, workers and consumers, but with the added "bonus" of slowing down economic growth even more than a direct tax would.

[ztSHOCK]

@MarkG45

In addition, big companies have an unfair advantage over small businesses in the same industry because they can afford to lobby congress for loopholes. Democrats are using the "close the loopholes" argument purely for political gain - they will be perfectly willing to negotiate new loopholes with lobbyists from big companies as soon as the fiscal spotlight is off of them. The only real solution is to end indirect taxation and repeal all corporate taxes.

[owingawat]

@ztSHOCK So it's okay that a couple hundred people own more money than entire countries while a billion live on less than a dollar a day? How is it right? Looking at it that way is saying Adam Smith's vile maxim of the masters of mankind: "All for ourselves and nothing for other people." Many people struggle working long hours while wages and benefits steadily decline as a rich few have a lot more money than those poor will ever make in there lives untouched sitting in a bank. How is that right?

[ztSHOCK]

@owingawat

Let me respond to your question with a question: how is that wrong?

[reverenceforall]

@ztSHOCK They do steal it. What are you talking about? Hopefully you live on the same planet as the rest of us.

[russellmcgaffin]

@macarion He's not implying anything. He is stating that taking more from one group and giving it to another group is theft. You're right, the tax system is a progressive system that penalizes success and to use a term thrown out there by most kids, "that's not fair." Taking more from high earners does not benefit the lower income earners in the long run, because the high income earners will either stop trying to make more or they will legally look for other ways to keep more of what they earn

[tanio12]

@russellmcgaffin

so what you are saying is warren buffet should be paying the same amount of taxes as his secretary umm okay.

[tanio12]

@macarion

so higher income people don't take advantage of the system? the biggest recipients of welfare is corporate america i thought everybody knew that.

[macarion]

@tanio12 Why are you telling me this?

[xaviqaz]

@tanio12 The same in Europe. The real effective corporate tax rate in a country like France is 10%, well below the nominal 33%. What you call "corporate welfare" (funded with taxes paid by those corporations and wealthy CEOs) is necessary to compete with emerging economies. You will not find a social democratic government in Europe raising taxes on businesses, they know the consequences; they prefer to raise indirect taxes like the VAT

[klrdotorg]

Great line Senator.