The rich don't have enough money to fix the debt. The debt, is more then
all the combined money of our country. Half a million dollars for each second
in a year.We need the rich to supply businesses, and jobs. This
would increase revenue for citizens, and government, not by increasing the debt.
by all means, if we are headed for a cliff - put your foot on the gas
What are the unions in this for? Their job is to represent their workers to the
company management. Don't give them political power or we will end up like
France where the unions are dictating the budget and government policy and going
on strike if the government doesn't do what they want.
"President Obama pressing business and labor on fiscal cliff"Should read: President Obama PUSHING business off the fiscal cliff.This man should not run a local library, let alone our country. 50% of
America shares the blame for re-electing the worst president in history.
@md"50% of America shares the blame for re-electing the worst
president in history."Yeah, but I wasn't old enough to be
among those who voted for Bush in 04. Kidding, obviously Buchanan was the worst
president in history.
the top 1% made record profits from the wars and government spending and should
pay more taxes. the wars brought higher oil and power costs and ex pres bush
made money his vice president stock in hallburton, and many other companies got
paid with no bids at all. in iraq 1 billion dollars was missplaced and never
found and none of the war was put in the budget at all. that is the deficit.
right now utah has 10th to the highest oil costs and almost noe of the fuel here
is imported. ask yourself why.
Stop calling it "revenues!" Quit playing their semantics shell game. The
government doesn't earn a penny from its citizens. "Revenues" is
DC-speak for TAXES! $1,600,000,000,000 in new TAXES is going to save the
economy?! WHAT?! How does the patient get healthier by giving blood?
NO ONE is proposing that this tax increase is the only thing that needs to be
done to fix the debt. Again, NO ONE. Not Obama. Not his supporters. No one.
Not one person thinks that raising these taxes is all it will take to get rid of
the debt. But without raising taxes, there are going to have to be a whole lotta
cuts made that will really, really hurt the economy. A BALANCED approach is
what Obama is arguing for. Some tax increases on the wealthy and some cuts. I
cannot figure out why the far right keeps arguing that these tax increases
won't solve the debt. Yeah, duh. Everyone knows that, including Obama.
Get a new argument.
@Wonder"I cannot figure out why the far right keeps arguing that
these tax increases won't solve the debt. Yeah, duh. Everyone knows that,
including Obama. Get a new argument."Because the government
NEVER has enough money and a tax increase will not solve the debt because
confiscating ALL of the money of the top earners will not cover the debt and
because increasing taxes can result in DECREASED government revenue when there
is less money to invest in the private sector.Obama has never been
as clear, passionate or open about his proposed cuts as he has been about his
tax-the-rich/class warfare - which you just acknowledged will not cure the
debt. Labeling anyone who notices as being "far right" says more
about you than it does them.(BTW: Will you give another lecture
about civility now? I need a good laugh)
It sure is comforting having Barack in charge at this moment - I mean the man
really understands economics and he would never allow this fiscal cliff thing to
actually happen... would he?? Just take a look at all the budgets the man has
passed ... ok never mind the budget thing but look at the leadership during
crisis like Libya..ok maybe not but I am guessing he has learned so much from
being on The View and Letterman that he now has everything figured out for sure.
Why are my hands sweating???
Elimination of 100% of discretionary spending (defense, education, roads, etc,
etc, etc) and paying only for medicaid, medicare and social security, will still
leave our country in debt...an unbalance budget.Raising taxes to any
level will not solve the imbalanced budgets. You can tax 100% of every
American, every business, take all the wealth and still not solve the budget and
debt issues beyond a year. The problem remains a spending issue.
The federal government as embodied in the President and the Congress (who write
& sign laws) spends too much. Many Americans do not believe that by raising
taxes the government will reduce spending. First cut spending to
prove resolve. Again, the government cannot tax and raise enough
revenue to solve the budget problem. Spending must be cut. Raising taxes will
only hurt business and its employees.
Why would anyone go to college, and become successful, if Obama takes your money
and give it away?
Can ANY of our liberal friends explain why the stock market has reacted so
positively to BO's re-election? We saw how much comfort the markets took
from his speech as they continued to tank. Why invest when your net return will
diminish?BO says he will tax business. With more paid in taxes,
there is less to pay in dividends. Then the dividends will be taxed at a higher
rate. Less income for dividends and more taxes on those dividends is a double
whammy for the investor. Why invest here when you get clobbered like that?
Foreign stocks look better and better. Capital will flee this country like
never before and domestic firms will fall further and further behind
competitively. When capital flees, jobs are not far behind them.With more jobs gone, less employment and less in taxes paid. It's a
lose-lose.But that's OK, because BO will have won his class
war, and we ALL will be poor (except the liberal ruling elite), just like in
Orwell's Animal Farm. (I just wonder who they will teach to chant
"four legs good, two legs better!)
What? Obama now wants the top 2% to pay higher taxes. What happened to the 99%,
somebody just got ripped off. By next week will it be the top 10%.Voting for Obama will be for me the most hilarious vote ever cast by
Americans. It is incredible that most of the nation can't see through this
guy. One more time, taxing the rich doesn't hurt the rich, it
hurts the people who work for the rich. You can demonize the wealthy all you
want, but they represent what has always been termed, "The American
@CI You do realize that everyone can read wonders comment right? Wonder
very clearly states that there needs to be a balanced approach of raising taxes
AND cutting spending. Something every right wing poster on this thread willfully
ignores. @lostright because they are clearly reacting to
Obama's reelection and not the European economic crisis that is being
reported right? Do you have even one once of actual evidence (not more political
hyperbole) to support that the stock market drop has had anything to do with
Obama being elected?
from the article people "Asked if he viewed it as a deal-breaker if
Republicans refused to allow the top tax rate to revert to 39.6 percent from the
current 35 percent, he said, 'I just want to emphasize I am open to new
ideas if the Republican counterparts or some Democrats have a great idea for us
to raise revenue, maintain progressivity, make sure the middle class isn't
getting hit, reduces our deficit.'"Sounds to me like it is
not Obama that is refusing to compromise.
Spring Street,you mean the European crisis was not on-going while our
election process was unfolding? the market was fairly stable and actually
showing some gains DESPITE the European crisis pre-election. only AFTER the
election did the markets start to tank. The European crisis is the excuse MSNBC
and the rest of the BO-backing media are playing to try and distract attention
from the BO-election caused market drop. his indirect answer to the
direct question that you quote is what an interviewer or interrogator would call
"bad behavior" - something said to avoid saying what you know will get
you in trouble. When push comes to shove, he will ONLY agree to ANYTHING if it
makes him look good, regardless of the effect on the economy.He says
he doesn't want the middle class hurt? He should not have run for
re-election, because his policies normalizing 8% unemployment have a larger
impact on the middle class than anyone else.
@CIso the new is reporting that it is due to the European crisis and you
are claiming it is not. where is your evidence to prove them wrong. Conspiracy
theories and baseless claims do not equate to evidence. As far as
his statement once again it is nice that you are so able to see into the future
but sad that you cannot even acknowledge that he has at least made some jester
to the GOP and so far the GOP has done nothing to show they have any willingness
to try. .
Tolstoy,a "jester" is a fool or someone who jests, as in "the
court jester". Did you mean gesture?And his gesture had too
many strings attached to be sincere. I think it was nothing more than a jest,
so I guess you were correct in the first place.When you say the GOP
has done nothing to show a willingness to try it tells me you watch nothing but
MSNBC, because Boehner HAS made plenty of gestures toward BO, and MNSBC would
tell you nothing concerning that.As for the Eurpean Crisis, a brief
view of the history of the DOW shows from August 27 to September 5 (while the
European crisis was ongoing) it ranged from 13,125 to 13,112 - basically flat.
Since then it has fallen to 12,550 - about a 500 point drop. the S&P has
done the same, from a range of 1410 to 1417 8/27-11/5, but then a drop to 1354
post election.BO apologists can delude themselves about the European
crisis, but the numbers from the markets as quoted above show the US equity
markets were bearing the news from Europe well, but not so the election results
@lost in DC -- Have it your way. Then, when the markets go up soon, it will all
be because of Obama and his policies, right? Clearly he is the only cause of the
market swinging one way or the other.
wonder,apology not accepted