Comments about ‘The wealthy won't simply stand by and pay higher tax rates’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 25 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
J Thompson

@LDS Liberal,

As my father used to say when one of us made ridiculous comments, "You're full of baloney".

Twisting the facts won't make them true. The "War Powers Act", requires that the President notify Congress of any military action within 48 hours. The Act allows the President to pursue war for 60 days without the consent of Congress. Without their consent, he has an additional 30 days to remove all military personnel from the war zone.

Congress approved all military actions authorized by President Bush. Congress approved all spending for the military actions authorized by President Bush.

Your argument has no merit. It is false in its premise and it is false as you presented it.

Meanwhile, the "wealthy" will not continue to carry your water. They're tired of being your "gofer". They are tired of you demanding that they pay for Obama's programs.

As was already posted, the top 1% pay 36% of all taxes. In addition, they are not a burden on the government. They do not cost the government 36% of its expenses; they don't even cost the government 1% of its expenses.

Pleasant Grove, UT

@ECR "I'm only disparaging those whose only priority in life is the accumulation of wealth."

And I'm saying, a man who does his charitable giving with money he has voted out of the pockets of others has no right to assume he is morally superior to them.

J Thompson


Either you are wrong or Obama is wrong. He told all of America that if Congress did not give in to his demands, that taxes would be raised on all Americans when the Bush Tax Cut expired. Using those same words, you say that your taxes and the taxes of every household in America did not increase when Obama's "tax holiday" expired. Who is right, you or Obama? Are you telling us that Obama lied to us? Are you telling us that he used an empty threat because taxes were not going to go up if the Bush Tax Cuts expired? You're redefining words to hide a tax increase. You know it. I know it. Every taxpayer in America knows it.

You claim that you don't want the "rich guy" to pay your way. Why don't you demand that he be taxed at the same rate as you are taxed? Unless you're a "rich guy", he'll still pay much more than you, but he'll pay the same rate.

When the left redefines words to tell us that "up" is "down" because they walk lock-step with Obama, they insult our intelligence.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

J Thompson,

You are conflating two separate tax issues.

The expiration of the tax holiday was never in question. Neither side wanted to extend the holiday.

The expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts was, of course, a matter of significant discussion and political chatter.

I am unconcerned about Obama so please don't direct any of that at me. I am simply trying to help you understand that there are two wholly separate tax issues here.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@J Thompson,

And as my Grandfather used to say when one of us made ridiculous comments, "That's a bunch of Malarkey".

Congress approved all military actions authorized by President Bush. Congress approved all spending for the military actions authorized by President Bush.
BUT (and you conviently ignored this KEY part of it -- Congress never approved FUNDING for it -- hence the Deficeit Debates now.)

So, it is your argument that has no merit.

SECOND of all now --

You never answered my question s either
The Bush Wars were never "Constitutional".

1. Congress declares war - not Bush -- per the Constitution [you must've been asleep at the switch on that train wreck],

2. The "War Powers Act", we've already discussed -- and 13 years is still ridiculous.

But what about this one:
3. What enemies? [Foreign and Domestic...blah, blah, blah]
Iraq never invaded or declared War on the United States, neither did Afghanistan.

Oh, and one other thing,
You can split my Bush War portion of the bill with your friend Mike Richards...
Perhaps RedShirt will chime in, and you all can split it 3 ways....lighten the load.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

"The top 1% pay 36% of all taxes."

When the top 1% owns 40% of all the wealth in this country, and take home triple the percentage of national income that they did 30 years ago, I have no problem with the percentage of all taxes that the top 1% pay.

What's absurd is that they have convinced so many people that the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of a few is somehow a "good" thing when it is the very antithesis of democratic values.

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I'm onto you, Mike Richards. There's no way a sober person could make the statements you make with a straight face. I suspect you're really a liberal and are making all these outrageous claims just to illustrate just how ridiculous the reasoning of the Right is. Bravo, Mike. You're succeeding.

Ogden, UT

J Thompson,
There is a third option, and it involves you being wrong. As Twin Lights stated, you are badly mixing two separate issues. And it's a transparent deflection to avoid admitting that Obama gave everyone a temporary tax break which conservatives refuse to acknowledge, and then blame him for not renewing it even though a) neither Republicans nor Democrats wanted to, so it wasn't going to happen, and b) it was known from the very beginning that it would be a temporary 2-year tax holiday. It isn't my fault that you didn't pay enough attention to the news to know this was going on.

Using the specter of Obama lying as leverage against me is a waste of your time. Obama isn't my prophet, he is the better of two candidates. Like all politicians I can find several examples of him lying at Politifact.

So it really comes down to why you are so unable to admit that Obama did something right by giving us a 2-year tax break. Or criticize Republicans for not pushing for its renewal. You may have insulted your own intelligence, unfortunately.

Fourth comment, I'm out.


Why do we let Mike Richards and J Thompson(who are obviously the same person) suck up all the oxygen on these boards day after day with ridiculous statements and assertions? Choosing to ignore people who refuse to acknowledge reality is a better alternative that spending numerous posts in vain.

J Thompson


Your reasoning implies that Obama's "tax holiday" was meant to be temporary; that everybody knew that he would add $1,200 per year to their tax bill anytime that he wanted; that paying more in taxes is not an increase; that "up" is "down" and that "red" is "cyan". You also infer that Bush's tax holiday is somehow different because Obama said that the Bush tax holiday, if removed, would be a tax increase.

Obama ran a campaign where he told every an woman and child in America that their taxes would not increase unless they made more than $250,000 per year. I don't make $250,000 per year. I don't even make $60,000 per year, but he increased my families taxes by $1,200 a year. You can claim that increasing taxes on every family in America is not an increase. No one but Obama agrees with you. "More" = "increase". "Less" = "decrease".

The rich guy is through with Obama's threats. Obama might fool his followers, but he doesn't fool the people who pay the government's bills.

Burke, VA

Nate - The only ones who think they are morally superior to anyone are those who actually think that folks who make less money than they do aren't entitled to healthcare, education and other basics of life. For many of the wealthy class it is a matter of them thinking poor people just don't deserve to be educated or cared for. It's a prejudice as old as our country.

L White
Springville, UT

What a hoot!

Is 1aggie serious? Who made him/her America's free speech censor?

People, let's turn the question around. Should we let 1aggie post anti-conservative comments? Isn't that just what LDS Liberal, Open Minded Morom and the rest of the liberal posters do? Oh I get it. They're all the same person. They have to be. There couldn't be more than one person in Utah that holds those views.

Do liberals understand that even though they own the East Coast newspapers, they don't own the Deseret News and they were not appointed by our Creator to be America's censors.

They can't make a convincing argument to support their point of view so they resort to attacking people like M Richards, J Thompson, Redshirt and other reasonable posters. Isn't that what Obama does? Doesn't he throw everybody under the bus if their viewpoint contradicts his?

Somebody told us that the "rich guy" has had enough. I think that most Americans have had enough. We're all getting tired of the personal attacks. If the left has a point, let them make it.

salt lake, UT

So basically the author and the posters here believes the wealthy are five year olds that are going to take their toys and go home if they don't get their way? The same way they did when the tax rate was the same throughout the 90's? oh thats right they are not five year olds. Its sad when liberals think more highly of the rich then so called conservatives.

Pleasant Grove, UT

@ECR "...entitled..."

None of us are entitled to health care, education, or even food, if it means taking from someone else against their will. Our true entitlement is the freedom to earn these things for ourselves.

We do have a moral obligation to help those in need. This doesn't give the needy a right to take steal from us. Nor does it give anyone the right to steal in order to give to the needy; we should care for the needy with money that belongs to us. Nor does it give anyone the right to send the tax collector to do the stealing for them; a person cannot delegate to others powers which he himself does not have. A majority cannot grant themselves this right by voting it to themselves.

This is where we've gone wrong, and the reason why so many people of means are saying enough is enough. You should be grateful that they put up with your immoral scheme for as long as they did.

Provo, UT

With all the people leaving the state with higher rates, these states are just going to become welfare states. The only people living there will be the people who can't pack up and leave because they have been living off the government for so long. And then we will have them going to the federal government begging for a bail-out, just like California tried to do a few years ago to force the federal government to buy it's state bonds.

When will people stop looking at only the benefits of all the different issues they want passed and start looking at the costs associated with them. Obama has approved over $1 trillion in stimulus and is requesting more. Congress hasn't passed a budget in over 6 months. We have been running a budget deficit for more than a decade and yet people clamour for more and more of the government money for this project of that one. What people don't realize is that they are begging the people in Washington to steal from their children and grandchildren.

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

"When will the greed ever end?"


Actually, L White, if you reread what I said you will see that I didn't say people shouldn't be allowed to post, but rather to take up all the oxygen. And the way to stop that is for the reasonable people (of any persuasion) to start ignoring the irrational posters who drone on day after day.

Durham, NC

Total trash reporting. If this had any weight behind it, you would find no rich people in California nor New York State - two states with the some of the highest state income tax rates. And yet, you don't see a whole host of rich people moving from the peninsula in the bay area to tax havens like Utah valley. There are so many other factors that drive where people live - taxes is only a minor factor.... even for the ultra rich.

Louie - if you are paying 63 percent of your income in taxes.... you need a lot of help. A lot of help. Go find yourself a good accountant or certified financial planner.... because your situation is out of control. Even Frances proposed 75% tax (which failed to get approved) on had that tax rate on income over and in excess of the first 3 million dollars earned. I personally never paid more than 25% nominal tax rate on the total taxes you claim. Romney and Warren Buffet, half of what I pay. So you are doing something very wrong.... very very wrong.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Is this a proposal to evade taxes? Some people hate anyone and anything that takes what they hoard out of insecurity.

Res Novae
Ashburn, VA

@J Thompson:

"Your reasoning implies that Obama's "tax holiday" was meant to be temporary;"

What part of "tax holiday" implies otherwise? The law specified how long it would last before automatically expiring.

"that everybody knew that he would add $1,200 per year to their tax bill anytime that he wanted;"

No, everyone knew (or should have known) that the extra money in their paychecks for two years was temporary. Obama couldn't change that anytime he wanted -- Congress would have to repeal the existing law.

"that paying more in taxes is not an increase;"

You're not paying a higher percentage now than you were in 2010. Without the holiday, your rates would not have gone up this year and you'd have paid the higher rate for the past two years. Perhaps you'd prefer that?

"Obama ran a campaign where he told every [m]an (sic) woman and child in America that their taxes would not increase unless they made more than $250,000 per year."

He was discussing *income tax* increases. That's different from payroll tax. Context matters.

"but he increased my families taxes by $1,200 a year"

Take it up with Congress for not extending the holiday.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments