Obama announces debt plan built on taxes on rich

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 21, 2011 8:26 p.m.

    Re: Lane Myer | 4:44 p.m. Sept. 19, 2011
    "the Republicans motto: Spend and don't tax - just run up the deficit!"

    No, the Republican motto is "Don't spend money you don't have, and [put a little aside for a rainy day."

    Those who under stand interest earn it while those who don't pay it.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:30 p.m.

    @ tom jr.,

    I was agreeing with you, and liked the perspective of your last paragraph that I referred to. Sorry if my comparison to my mortgage sounded otherwise.

    I was just making a feeble point at how tough this is going to be to fix.

  • goodDr. sandy, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 9:33 p.m.

    As a person who makes over $250,000 and one who runs a small business I simply offer you this. As my profits increase, I hire more people. I then pay payroll tax on these people. If my taxes were to be increased, then my profits would be decreased. I would be forced to lay off one or more people ( I currently employ 14 people with a business that did $1.3 million worth of business). We can pretend this, that, and the other, but I personally am not willing to pay 3-7% more in taxes and take a loss of $15-20,000 in profits. This is how small businesses work. We are the backbone of the US. Not too many loopholes for the non-uber rich upper middle class, so I have to pass on my losses to others. Keep my taxes where they are! As it is, I work January to May for the government, I'm not willing to throw in June.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 8:32 p.m.

    If we went to a true flat tax the rich would be squealing. The flat tax proponents all want their own little pet deductions for businesses that the average joe doesn't get (kind of like things are now). Tax me on my increase and tax the the millionaire on his increase and don't give any of us any deductions and I am good with it.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 5:42 p.m.

    Re: JoeBlow | 4:42 p.m. Sept. 19, 2011

    You really sure you want to hear the honest answer? In the New York 9th US House District a novice Republican with $200,000 beat a well known Democrat with $500,000 where Democrats have a 3 to 1 ratio of registered voters. Even Bill Clinton's personal pleas couldn't save the Democrat.

    People are worse off today than they were 3 years ago and don't believe Obama is able git-r-done. The proof is in Bob Turner's election and you'd better believe Obama is losing sleep over it.

  • tom jr. north ogden, uT
    Sept. 19, 2011 5:05 p.m.


    The Boston University economist is saying that we need massive tax increases or massive spending cuts to close the fiscal gap. Selling our souls to China, for example, is simply increasing our debt load. He's talking taxes and cuts, not selling more debt instruments.

    The President's current recommendation is to cut $3 Trillion in spending over ten years. Projections are that we will spend $1.5 Trillion more than we take in for each of ten years, or that we will add $15 Trillion to our current $15 Trillion dollar national debt, or $30 Trillion in ten years. Obama's cuts will make that only $27 Trillion in ten years, which should make all of us feel better, especially the boys and girls at S&P.

    The answers are MASSIVE cuts, and/or MASSIVE tax increases. Our people in Washington are proposing band-aids when amputations are needed. We are in a profound fix.

  • Woodyff Mapleton, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 5:00 p.m.

    You will never solve the problem by 'taxing the rich', there aren't enough 'rich'. Over 46% of Americans pay no federal taxes. Obama is always saying everyone should have skin in the game. To solve the problem we have to put a limit on spending by government and overhaul the tax code, drop the personal and corporate income tax and either have a national sales tax or a consumption tax. We also have to get a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. Obama's plan is really just a campaign speech. By the way, where is the media on his plan to reduce Medicare benefits? I listened to the speech and I heard him, so where is the outrage? We don't see an add show Obama pushing an old person over a cliff in a wheelchair. It is class warfare, not math!

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:44 p.m.

    wer | 1:21 p.m. Sept. 19, 2011
    South Jordan, UT
    It used to be "tax and spend". Now it's "spend and tax".


    Which is better than the Republicans motto:

    "Spend and don't tax - just run up the deficit!"

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:42 p.m.

    "Since nothing else Obama has tried has worked the time has come to dust off the old playbook and try this tried and true strategy."

    3 easy questions

    Can you tell me what shape the economy was in when Obama took over?

    Can you tell me why it was there?

    Can you tell me who was in charge when it got there?

    Honest answers only

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:38 p.m.

    @ tom jr.,

    Interesting post. Especially your last paragraph.

    So, fixing the U.S. debt problem would be like me trying to figure out how to pay off my mortgage. Either I suddenly cut all of my spending outside of critical stuff for the rest of my life, or I get another job.

    Or, I just sell the house and live however I can (renting) for the rest of my life.

    The equivalent to that for the U.S. would be to sell its soul to the rest of the world (kind of already doing that, heh), then just happily go off into the future debt-free, but owned by the rest of the world.

    This debt issue simply proves that you can't tax and spend your way to prosperity, like liberals think you can.

  • Lane Myer Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:35 p.m.

    Rifleman | 2:12 p.m. Sept. 19, 2011
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Tax the rich. Something every middle class voter should be in favor of. Since nothing else Obama has tried has worked the time has come to dust off the old playbook and try this tried and true strategy. Time to punish the greedy rich people for their industry and hard work ethic.


    Find out how many jobs were created during Clinton's 8 years in office - he raised taxes on the rich.

    Compare them to how many jobs were created during Bush's 8 years in office - he cut taxes on the rich.

    These are the latest figures we have to compare the differences.

    Guess who wins hands down!

  • Palintram Holladay, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:17 p.m.

    I love to see people try to defend the Uber rich. It goes like this: Q: Please remind me again why the super rich shouldn't pay more taxes? A: b/c The bottom 50% doesn't pay taxes. Q: But the bottom 50% don't have any money. A: Well, if the super rich keep getting taxed it will never ever trickle down. Oh, I see clearly now.

  • tom jr. north ogden, uT
    Sept. 19, 2011 4:15 p.m.

    This from Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Boston University:

    We're broke for a reason. We've spent six decades accumulating a huge official debt (U.S. Treasury bills and bonds) and vastly larger unofficial debts to pay for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits to today's and tomorrow's 100 million-plus retirees.
    The government's total indebtedness -- its fiscal gap -- now stands at $211 trillion, by my arithmetic. The fiscal gap is the difference, measured in present value, between all projected future spending obligations -- including our huge defense expenditures and massive entitlement programs, as well as making interest and principal payments on the official debt -- and all projected future taxes.
    To grasp the magnitude of our nation's insolvency, consider what tax hikes or spending cuts are needed to eliminate our fiscal gap. The answer is an immediate and permanent 64% increase in all federal revenues or an immediate and permanent 40% cut in all federal noninterest spending.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 19, 2011 3:53 p.m.

    @common sense in Idaho,

    Can you tell me where I can find a copy of this debt plan?

    Are there any evidence of BO trying to reduce debt in any form?

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 3:44 p.m.

    According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, it is true that ONLY 38 percent of "tax units" which can be singles, couples, or families are projected to have zero or negative income tax liability in 2009. About 60% of these households make < $20,000 per year.

    Being exempt from income tax doesn't mean youre exempt from federal taxes.

    Everyone who works is liable for payroll taxes, contributions to Medicare and Social Security that come out of every paycheck. There are also excise taxes on some goods and services, most notably the 18.4 cents per gallon tax on gasoline.

    The Congressional Budget Office found that earners in the lowest quintile, where most of those with no income tax liability fall, shouldered 4.3% of the payroll tax burden in 2005 and 11.1% of the excise taxes. Their effective tax rate (in those categories, according to the CBO, was in fact significantly higher than the rate of the top quintile.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 3:21 p.m.

    For those liking the idea of taxing everyone the same, like a flat tax (say 10%), you're not thinking clearly.

    The poor and the lower half of the middle class wouldn't survive on their low incomes if they paid that much tax. They currently don't with today's tax system, and barely make it as it is.

    And, the richer half of the U.S. already pays more than 10%. So a flat tax would simply make things worse for the poor and better for the rich, the exact opposite of what you want!

    And even making it so the poorer people don't pay the full 10% still doesn't let the richer off the hook.

    The tax code needs rewritten, not replaced.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 2:12 p.m.

    Tax the rich. Something every middle class voter should be in favor of. Since nothing else Obama has tried has worked the time has come to dust off the old playbook and try this tried and true strategy. Time to punish the greedy rich people for their industry and hard work ethic.

  • common sense in Idaho Pocatello, id
    Sept. 19, 2011 2:08 p.m.

    Hey BLUR, let's eliminate taxes on the wealthy completely. That's what you are proposing. Right? Then let's raise the taxes on the poor people of the country.

    Thus more jobs will be created.


    It needs to be fair and balanced. A middle of the road approach. Everyone paying their fair share.

    Get it now??

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 1:56 p.m.

    o's talk for next week
    bush bad
    bush's fault
    inherited a terrible economy
    rich bad
    non taxpayers good
    spending is good
    cutting expenses is bad
    government grows jobs
    capitalism is bad

  • blur Murray, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 1:48 p.m.

    Increase taxes on the rich and at the same time give corporate welfare to my political buddies. Mr. Obama may be really intelligent but he isn't very smart. His plans and actions continue to run the economy down the drain.

    For you Socialists out there, how many of you have gotten a job from a homeless person or somebody living below poverty level? My guess is none. How many of you have gotten a job from somebody including corporations that had incomes of over $250,000? My guess, all most all of you. The more money the rich have the more they will spend and the more jobs that will be created. When did you get the stupid idea that the rich stuff their money into mattresses?

    Tax warfare on the rich is nothing but economic war on yourself.

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 1:21 p.m.

    It used to be "tax and spend". Now it's "spend and tax".

    Anybody who thinks he is trying to do anything other than get re-elected, just raise your hand.

    Thought so...

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:56 p.m.

    Re: FDRfan | 12:37 p.m. Sept. 19, 2011

    The Democrats were in control of the House when Obama said "We dont mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back. Now that Republicans are in control of the House and timid Democratic Senators and Representatives are siding with them Obama may be wishing he'd been a little less divisive.

    If you want something from somebody it always helps if you are nice.

  • FDRfan safety dictates, ID
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:37 p.m.

    I think every one filing a tax return ought to pay at least some money ($5.00 or more) to the US Treasury, even those getting earned income credit. But the President's tax proposal and jobs bill should be passed. He was elected President by a substantial margin of American voters yet the obstructionist Congress, who represent only the wealthy few, have managed to block his every move. We can do nothing but hunker down until election 2012. Hopefully, a 3rd party will emerge and represent the values and economic interests of the middle class.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:37 p.m.

    Here goes more American jobs. Thanks to the GOP. State-run Chinese companies are pouring billions of dollars into development projects in a region long considered Americas backyard the Caribbean. "Ross Perot was fiercely against NAFTA. Knowing what we know now, was Ross Perot right?." Efforts to reduce the federal deficit are critical to the future of our nation. These cuts, however, must be part of a more comprehensive plan that will encourage job creation in the private sector in order to put unemployed Americans back to work. The plan should include comprehensive tax reform that will lower both personal and corporate tax rates, as well eliminate tax loopholes. In addition, Washington needs to reduce the number of government regulations that are strangling private sector growth and job creation. They want to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits for baby boomers, calling these old-age subsidies. We didn't borrow from our retirement fund. Our congressmen did. Cut the programs they created from our retirement fund, not Social Security and Medicare. Tax the ultra-rich. What are you scared of?. NO MORE Corporation KICK-BACKS and trips from lobbyists and bureaucrats?. I think so.

    Like it or not, "My Views."

  • Richard Saunders Provo, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:30 p.m.

    @Spring street "So any ideas of how to get our elected officials attention and get them to focus on reasonable changes?"

    I think you have summed up the problem of our age. I've said before that we don't need "get-out-the-vote" campaigns but voter education campaigns. Let's not encourage people to vote who don't care. I think the way we reward seniority in congress is part of it. People defend Orrin Hatch because of potential committee assignments, but we need new blood. The current system encourages the go along to get along mentality and kicking problems down the road. We need a way to reward the politicians who make the difficult choices. Finally I think we have to change the view of what the role of government is in our lives if we want lower taxes. We can only accomplish lower taxes with a smaller government that does less for us. People talk a lot about compromise but the only compromise we ever get in Washington is an ever more progressively-sized government with a continually conservatively-taxed people. The numbers don't add up.

  • Richie Saint George, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:18 p.m.

    What is Obama's plan for next week? I don't even watch him on TV anymore. When are the people going to put the hammer down on this community organizer. He couldn't balance a check book.

  • Anonymous Infinity American Fork, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 12:12 p.m.

    Obama is just another liberal political hack. He would have us go back to the old Roosevelt era of taxing the wealth up to 90%. We need a tax system that is fair and uniform across the board; i.e. 10% for everyone....no credits or deductions across the board. What is fair about taxing someone 30%, 40%, 50% or whatever amount someone could conjure up and say it is fair? That just defies logic or common sense. We are alread overtaxed significantly when the local city/county, state, federal taxes are added up. The aggregate total of these taxes are already confiscating up to 50% of our disposable income. The question to be asked is how much government can we afford? Government spending at all levels of government is out of control, and all of this is exasperated by the growing unionism in the public (government) sector. I am sick of it. We can't afford it. It needs to be reined in and soon, or this country will sink.

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:56 a.m.

    The real Carnak could at least see into the future and divine answers that had been kept in a mayonnaise jar on Funk and Wagnalls' front porch since noon yesterday.

    He did not exaggerate the inaccurate statements of those whose job it is to provide misinformation about this Administration.

    "60% of Americans pay NO taxes" is something you cannot document because it is not true.

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:48 a.m.


    I mean how many jobs will be created. Republicans always say that taxing the job creators is bad policy. Well, I am willing to believe that if they can demonstrate that the previous "Bush" tax cuts actually created jobs...quantify please and show us studies that indicate for each 1% of taxes cut at the upper levels, X number of jobs will be created. Unless the facts/studies are there we just have empty Republican mantras.

    Why would want one want to read the tax book? The tax code has been created mostly to give the rich tax breaks. What is fair to me that we each pay in varying degrees according to our ability to pay. What you want is equality and equality in tax burdens is not necessarily fair in my opinion.

    The President divides our country? Really? I thought it was all the Republicans who questioned the President's citizenship, have called him a communist, socialist and now advocating "class warfare" that have divided the country. Sal Alinsky is one of the great leaders of the nonsocialist left, so I am confused by your point.

  • IDC Boise, ID
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:41 a.m.

    I totally agree with Obama on everyone doing their part. Everyone should pay tax. If stimulus checks are mailed out, everyone should get one. Enough with the 46% of earners who are getting a free ride to live in this wonderful country. Let's all roll up our sleeves and start paying our own way.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:33 a.m.

    Seems like a reasonable place to start. Not sure why so many on this board are so opposed to closing loopholes that are only available to certain groups or to the wealthiest of Americans, and at the same time went to extract a few dollars from those who can't even feed their family now. It frightens may that so many in this state believe that to consider asking the wealthy to pay a little bit more in taxes is such a horrible idea. Before anyone goes crazy please don't tell me they already pay 80% of the income tax. They have 90% of the money so they are getting of light. They wealthy are not creating jobs right now, they are simply getting wealthier, and the republicans want to cut their taxes so they can have all the money not just most of the money. I am in what is left of the middle class, the FICA break helps me, but notice the republicans are against that, because it really doesn't help the wealthy, because they pay no FICA taxes on their income over $100,000.

  • Carnak Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:30 a.m.

    Before asking the people already paying 90% of the total tax revenue (that's right people, the top 5% of earners in America pay over 90% of the total tax revenue collected by the Treasury) to pay more, how about a plan to have the 60% of Americans who pay NO tax, pay atleast some tax.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:18 a.m.


    Don't you mean how many jobs will be 'saved or created?'

    Also, you sound like you are all for fairness. If that is the case then you believe that everybody should have some skin in the game no matter how little or much they make. Have you ever read the fair tax book? It sure would be better than the tax system we have now, that only divides us and is used to buy votes from dependent people.

    Why does this president always divide our country by race or class? Sal Alinsky is alive and well, and lives in the white house.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:15 a.m.

    Allright Real debt reduction finally instead of mean-spirited tea party cut welfare and social programs the evangelicals don't like only.

    Sept. 19, 2011 11:12 a.m.

    spring street | 11:00 a.m. Sept. 19, 2011

    "We have tried the old throw the bums out many times but frankly it gets us nowhere." How hard have we tried w/senator Orrin Hatch in his 34th year.

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:07 a.m.

    If the President's plan is "class warfare," then surely the Republican plan to gut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is genocide on the Middle Class.

    The 50% that don't pay any income tax is a fabrication. The majority of Americans who do not pay income taxes are single mothers with children or singles who work part time or at minimum income jobs. The correct percentage is closer to 38% and most of those people are the result of the earned income tax credit championed by the Bush administration.

    Why shouldn't the rich pay at least as much in taxes as I pay? If tax cuts really do produce jobs, how many jobs exist because of the last two "Bush" tax cuts? How many jobs will be created for each 1% in taxes we cut? Make Republicans cite some reliable study on both questions.

    Sept. 19, 2011 11:04 a.m.

    @knayrb01 - the troops will not be unemployed. Most of them are active duty and will just retrun to home station like they always have. Those that are in the National Guard or reserves will return to the same jobs they had when they were initially deployed. USERRA law guarantees that these troops can return to their previous job. In any case, we have been rotating active duty and guard troops through that region for the last 8 1/2 years. It's a pretty standard procedure by now. Besides, the Status Of Forces Agreement signed in 2008 by President Bush mandates that we will have all troops out by the end of 2011.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:00 a.m.

    @richard saunders

    I agree, I think we need to look at how we do business from top to bottom. I think any ends to the tax cuts need to come with fiscal responsibility and the added revenue actually needs go go towards that end. So any ideas of how to get our elected officials attention and get them to focus on reasonable changes? We have tried the old throw the bums out many times but frankly it gets us nowhere. There is so much bad information out there its hard to wade through it all and try to find out whats really going on. Its far to easy to just find an answer that already fits our preconceived ideas and stop looking. Its going to take a far amount of discipline by the voters to get the right information and then try to hold their elected officials accountable.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 11:00 a.m.

    ""We can't just cut our way out of this hole," the president said."

    Then why did you dig the hole that deep, Mr. President? Wasn't it deep enough as it was before you came along and decided to make it a bottomless pit?

  • common sense in Idaho Pocatello, id
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:58 a.m.

    For the last unbelievable time Obama's plan does include spending cuts. READ THE PLAN. For goodness sake. It's a balanced approach to cutting the deficit. Increased revenues and spending cuts. Who here doesn't get that?

    That's what it's going to take. Let's get on with it. No more bickering while the country flounders.

    Also to the poster who said what about the unemployment rate if the wars are ended. Why don't we start another two or three wars? Think of the additional employment we will have. Pure genius.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:53 a.m.

    Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, Senate Republican leader, said the proposal would hurt corporate investment in an already stagnating economy caused by the Koch Brother's. He lies. State-run Chinese companies are pouring billions of dollars into development projects in a region long considered Americas backyard the Caribbean. China announced this week last it will provide $1 billion in loans to Caribbean nations to finance infrastructure projects. The loans will be made available through the state-run China Development Bank, Chinas Vice Premier Wang Qishan said in Port of Spain, capital of Trinidad and Tobago. China's wooing of the Caribbean is part of a global push by Beijing promoting loans and investment while seeking natural resources and political influence in the developing world from Africa to Latin America. U.S. Tea Party non-leaders criticized President Barack Obama's proposal for a new tax on millionaires, calling it "class warfare" and predicting it will face heavy opposition in Congress. Obama is expected to propose a "Buffett Tax" on people making more than $1 million a year as part of his recommendations to a congressional super committee seeking long-term deficit savings. Taxing the ultra-rich - great idea.

  • Richard Saunders Provo, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:45 a.m.

    @spring street
    I think we can have an adult conversation about this. I, personally, would hate to see any sort of tax hike be part of the equation, because it has been promised before as a way to balance the budget, but only led to more spending. BUT, if I am serious about balancing the budget, and I think I am, expiration of the Bush tax cuts has to be part of the plan. (they were never meant them to be permanent anyway). Everything has to be on the table. Military spending, the entitlements, some social programs will have to be cut or eliminated. We need overhaul and reform of the tax code. I think this should be our baseline. We have to agree that everything has to be part of the process, and then we can argue about amounts and timing and what makes us most solvent in the future.

  • knayrb01 sandy, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:40 a.m.

    Withdrawing all those troops from Iraq and Afghanistan means that all those troops will be unemployed. Was that calculated in the equation?

    Taxing the rich doesn't help because there isn't enough rich to make much difference. The rich will pass the cost onto the middle class anyway by reducing income of workers or charging more for products. Obama must cut programs and people need to quit relying on the government for day to day living.

    Sept. 19, 2011 10:40 a.m.

    One of the proposals of this plan is to change the way depreciaition of private jets is calculated. This is sure to wreck the economy.

  • reader1234 South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:39 a.m.

    I listened to his speech and he really has no idea what he is talking about or he knows he is lying. Liberals have to agree that his speech was very misleading. Buffets income tax rate is higher than his secretary's. It's his captial gains rate (15%) that is lower than his secretary's, but all the money he uses to invest to get captial gains has already been taxed at a very high 35%. He is not being honest.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:22 a.m.


    right because letting the ultra rich keep more of their money has really helped our economy over the last 10 years, right? NOT!

    Look I said it on the other thread of the same article and I will say it again here. We can go back and forth exchanging empty rhetoric (yes my comment above included) all day or we can grow up and realize any recovery is going to have to come from a combinations of cuts in services, increases in taxes and reforms of the system, but somehow I doubt this thread will ever get to a place we can have adult conversation about what we need to do, what do you all think? Prove me wrong, please prove me wrong I really want to be wrong about our ability to come up with realistic solutions.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2011 10:06 a.m.

    Tax and spend. Yup. That's definitely the way to prosperity. It's a time-proven process. Right?

    The more you tax your citizens, no matter their income, the more money they'll have to put back into the economy. Right?

    Yup, that really makes sense, doesn't it?


  • Jared Average, SE
    Sept. 19, 2011 9:41 a.m.

    $1 of the "spending reduction" comes from reductions that already were going to occur (Iraq and Afghanistan).

    As for raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations: "'It's only right we ask everyone to pay their fair share,' Obama said."

    So, is it fair that nearly 50% of income earners do not pay federal income taxes? Obama was quoted as saying everyone should pay their fair share but he only wants to raise taxes on the wealthiest. I'm not opposed to tax increases on the wealthiest but we should also do something about the 50% who do not pay. People have a difficult time feeling responsibility for things that they receive for free (the federal government). It's easy to want the government to do more when you do not have to foot the bill.

    Raising corporate income taxes is not a good idea though. We need to reduce corporate income taxes and streamline all of our taxes. Both Jon Hunstman and Mitt Romney have good ideas about addressing the deficit.

    Pres. Obama's plan is an okay plan but it's not the best fix for the problem. At best it delays the consequences of our fiscal irresponsibility a few years.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Sept. 19, 2011 9:40 a.m.

    just can't wait for buffet to be paying the same taxes as his secretary and for o's buddy jeff at ge to start paying taxes at all. you gotta love o and his continued class warfare and lack of reality. this is really going to get the economy going. libs better push hillary to run....did i really say that? c.o. gone in 15 months. wish it were sooner.