@non believerBy CRS do you mean Congress' propaganda unit? Why
should I give any credence to that? You know, everyone keeps saying that
it's been 'proven' that tax cuts don't create economic
growth. Even if that were true (though I'm not sure how you could prove
something like that) to say that the wealthy don't respond negatively to
increased taxes goes against every basic economic principle. Wealthy people,
when their incentives to continue to do business in this country are taken away,
are simply not going to do business in this country anymore. Look how many
people are getting fired. Look how many hours are being cut. Look how many
businesses are moving overseas. It's epidemic. To say that raising taxes
does not adversely affect our economy is to ignore basic economic theories
backed by plenty of recent news headlines, however anecdotal.
@3grandslamsif there are such obvious lies then surely you have some
actual evidence (not just more conspiracy theories) to support your assertions
right? lets see them.
To BYU Fan 1993CRS is well-known for analysis that is authoritative,
confidential, objective and nonpartisan. Its highest priority is to ensure that
Congress has 24/7 access to the nation’s best thinking.In
September they released a report documenting the fact that reducing taxes on the
wealthy does not, in fact, generate economic growth. Instead, the CRS found, the
trickle-down model appears to be "associated with the increasing
concentration of income at the top.
Say No to BO,$86 billion is the best case scenario. Likely, if taxes
are raised on the wealthy, they'll just do what they normally do when their
taxes are raised: hire more accountants, lawyers and politicians to get them out
of paying. Either that or they'll keep moving their money and business
overseas. Taxing the wealthy is a plan meant to fail. The middle class is who
President Obama had in mind all along to pay for his bailouts and handouts. This
is why the middle class overwhelmingly voted against him and why welfare
recipients and the super wealthy, like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Jay Z,
Beyonce, etc. voted for him.
It's really time the media did it's job, the very thing they were
given the privilege of free press for, expose the incredibly obvious lies we are
being told about Benghazi. The more the press is silent the more they look like
accomplices. Where's "deepthroat" when we need him?
Obama's rhetoric never changes. We can recite it from memory. "I am
asking that the wealthiest 3% of Americans pay a little bit more." "A
little bit more," turns out to be quite a bit when you increase the capital
gains, inheritance and income tax.But from a Washington standpoint,
it's only $86 billion. That might seem like a big sum, but we gave $4.2
billion away last year to children of illegal aliens in the form of child tax
credits. And some of those children have NEVER lived in the United States at
all!So, we can dump that $86 billion down the rabbit hole in DC...or keep
it in our economy in the form of savings, investment and purchases by the
I believe that America just voted "Forward" over the cliff if I am not
from the article earlier to day in the DN by ken thomas "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
Note that we saw this play last year, with the original cast. How can we expect
it to end differently?Obama will be defiant about a tax increase for the
wealthy. (Cut it where you want, but it will be something the 99%ers will be
pleased with.)And the GOP will say no.The "compromise" will
be that the economy is too sick to tolerate a tax increase or budget cuts and
they will figure out a way to delay taking substantial action for another couple
of years. (It's funny how these deadlines seem to lag behind the election
Tolstoy,VST's comment is supported by the article. I don't why
you say a line in the sand is not a line in the sand. I don't know HOW you
can honestly say he is open to compromise when he has drawn a line in the
sand.Maybe you don't know what it means to draw a line in the
Lol, has he addressed the petitions to secede yet? I think they've reached
25K by now.
Obama's insistence on taxing the rich is simply a political one. It
accomplishes little. A much greater effect would be to restructure our tax
system, broaden the tax base, eliminate deductions, and even lower the tax
rates. This would result in greater revenue to the treasury and introduce a
fairness that has been absent for decades. Taxing the rich doesn't even
come close to reducing our annual deficit and balancing the budget.
Better get the ole parachute out - dust it off and strap it on because we are
going over the edge of the cliff? Never fear - Barack is willing to
compromise...well maybe not but he is proposing new additional taxes!! At least
that is different than before! The man has one gear - forward - which isn't
the gear you want when you are on the edge of a cliff!!!
@VSTsecond page fifth paragraph of this article, "Obama said he was
'open to new ideas" but would not allow current tax rates to continue
for the top 2 percent of wage earners, drawing a line for Republicans who say
they will not tolerate any tax rate increases. Asked if the tax rates for the
rich had to return to Clinton-era levels, Obama indicated he was open to
negotiations."Standing by your comment does not change the
content of the article.
Let the sausage making begin.
There is one simple solution, a federal flat tax with no deductions and no
refunds. Then everybody and every business pays the same percentage of their
income. If the individual is receiving government assistance, they will have to
pay a flat tax on their income. No matter what the source of income is, it
would be taxed the same for everybody. It would be fair and would save our
economy. A flat tax would help us get out of debt.
Non believerSorry but you said it has been proven false once and for
all? Care to provide some sources on that? It's easy to make such a blanket
statement. Harder yet to hold it up
@vst and third try try actually reading the entire article before
commenting. Yes he said the current taxes breaks must end for the highest
earners but that he is willing to negotiate how and by how much taxes need to be
raised, He has also clearly indicated he thinks there should be cuts to spending
something that the republicans have been demanding. So now the ball is in
republicans court are they even willing to consider negations or are they going
or remain the party of no?
To VSTWhere has the GOP compromised on this same issue? 2/3rd of
Americans say this is fair! It is going to take tax increases, reduced spending
(cutting programs) and finding additional revenue sources to get our deficeit
under control. There is also the fact that tax cuts to the wealthy do not creat
jobs or revenue. So trickle down has been proven false once and for all! Where would you start?
See, that wasn't too hard, was it? Presidents should hold regular press
conferences with questions and answers, even difficult ones.@VST -
Obama's just satisfying his 99% friends. He knows that poking job creators
in the eye is a foolish thing to do, especially when the payback is so small.
He doesn't understand that business can and will go where taxes are low and
labor is cheap.