This president has demonstrated that he is completely incapable of working with
congress. It is my way or the highway with Obama. He is a dictator at heart.
Obama has only one play in his playbook and that is class warfare. He knows
nothing else. This is great politics. We can all feel good for sticking it to
the man. But the economics is ridiculous. The deficit is a function of spending
and Obama is unwilling to give up the credit card. The tax on the "rich"
is nothing more than a gimmick. A ruse on the uninformed. It may be worth going
over the fiscal cliff if this is the only way to stop Obama from spending us
A lot of chicken here. It is either a political game of chicken, or Chicken
Little crying, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling." In my opinion
neither are believable.
@ mike Richards...... "Unlesa you withhold taxes for services rendered, YOU
are a criminal."..... ummmm.... no. If you hire an independent contractor,
you don't withhold taxes. I am not sure where you are getting this
information from...but it is really really bad. If these people are on your
payroll...... something completely different... then you are correct. But baby
sitting, lawn mowing, house painting, any number of other services.... are done
as independent contractors. Full time nanny, staff gardener, live in help.....
different story... you need to with hold for these people.But the
other point you are making is absolutely spot on. If all people paid their
taxes and didn't cheat, we all would pay lower taxes. When someone cheats
on their taxes, they are just passing the burden on to their neighbors. Its
that attitude of "if your not smart enough to cheat the government, its your
fault" selfish attitude that is a real problem.And we wonder why
each generation respects authority less..... they are just following their
Lost in DC,"Boehner's plan is to close loopholes", ya I
have heard that but any chance he could clue us in on what loopholes he will
close? The only "loopholes" I have heard the republicans talk about are
the mortgage deduction and the charitable deductions which would hit the middle
class hard and I know that is important if we are going to have any tax
increase. I haven't heard the deduction for private jets being discussed,
probably because not a lot of middle class people have private jets, and taking
away this deduction would only impact the wealthy so we can't have that.If I am wrong and you can share the specific loopholes Mr. Boehner plans
to close I would love to hear them.
The point that seems to be ignored by the Truth Seeker is this, what incentive
does any business large or small have to grow and earn more then $250,000
annually ? What is the motivation to succeed ? Why would you want to get up
every morning to work to send more of your money to an out of control federal
government ? Truth is this when you attack a fellow citizen because
he has eraned more then you, you unwittingly attack yourself.
re:GrundleA majority of Americans view Republicans as
obstructionists, unwilling to compromise. When Republicans won the 2010
election, Obama compromised, and extended ALL the tax cuts for another two
years. Can you cite an example of Republican compromising in the past 4 yrs?"The Bush Tax cuts resulted in increased revenues."Revenue increases year to year due to inflation and population growth. The
question is, did revenues increase aside from population and inflation? We found that a slew of government economists-CBO, the Treasury
Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation and the 2008 Council of Economic
Advisers said that tax cuts may spur economic growth but they lead to revenues
that are lower than they would have been if the cuts hadn’t been enacted.
The supply-side theory--demonstrated by the Laffer curve-suggested
that a higher tax rate can generate just as much revenue as a lower rate. But
most economists are not Laffer-curve purists. Instead, while they may believe in
the power of tax cuts to create an economic boost, they don’t say that
growth is enough to completely make up for lost revenue.(factcheck)
utahboniThe Utah delegation is on the side of obstruction? They
don’t back the recalcitrant BO – you have to backward.JoeBlow,It IS correct. Payroll taxes are NOT federal income taxes.
Payroll taxes are earmarked for specific uses, unlike income taxes. Sales and
property taxes are LOCAL, taxes, not federal taxes.Fred,You
mean Jeff Imelt, BO’s close friend and campaign contributor? Yeah, Boehnor
has a solution – close the loopholes they use to avoid taxes, but BO would
rather hold us all hostage for political gain than consider ANYTHING from
Boehner.And of course you conveniently forget the 5% of the
population who pay something like 90% of the personal income tax. But hey, if
that facts don’t support your political philosophy, why even mention
them.Utahbusinessman,Good point. Proof BO was NOT born in
Africa – he must have been born in GREECE!
mohokat - I wish every reader of these forums would read your post
and understand what you are saying!Our president is our duly elected
leader. He has shown an incredible lack of leadership on every front. His
proposals have not been serious attempts at leadership, but rather continually
puts out the message of "my way or the highway". President Clinton had
the amazing advantage of the internet boom and would have looked good no matter
what he did. However, He demonstrated leadership with a Republican congress and
accomplished some great things! Despite his horrendous lack of personal
morality, I think he is one of the better presidents we have had in my lifetime.
Like Reagan, Clinton's numbers don't tell the whole story about a
nation buoyed up with hope and optimism that a great leader brings to the table.
Still Blue after all these years - The Bush Tax cuts
resulted in increased revenues. The spending created increased deficits.
Despite UtahBlueDevil's cherry-picking the numbers, you are exactly right!
Re:MikeRichardsAn employer does not have to pay employer taxes if
these three conditions exist:the employee is under age 18 at any time
during the year and the work is in or around a private residence as an employee
andthe employee’s main occupation is not providing house hold
services. (For a teenager, their primary occupation is to be a student, not a
babysitter.)For example: Sarah, age 16, goes to a neighbor’s
house and babysits their three children several times a month. In one month she
makes $75. She is a teenage household employee. Sarah will not owe self-
employment tax on her babysitting income. If she earns less than $5,700 (in
2009), she will not owe federal income tax either.
The Problem with the President is he lives in his own little world and
doesn't see the normal person. His aides, Czars, consultants and executive
people make sure he doesn't get the real world picture of what is going on.
Even though the election is over the rhetoric from the President's
contingent is perfectly aligned to thwart our trust in government for another 4
years. The two-year campaign has paid off for him and those that voted for him
will find out it is not always a rose garden invitation they will get in the
next 4 years. Where is the crisis today with the budget shortfalls?
We keep on giving him a blank check and it appears he doesn't need
Congress to approve of anything, he just takes it and keeps the currency
Fred44,If you don' t withhold taxes for "baby sitters or
for boys in the neighborhood who mow your lawn, YOU are a tax cheat. YOU are
the problem. YOU are causing America to fail.Everyone who cheats is
a criminal.Everyone who thinks that he is exempt is a criminal.Unlesa you withhold taxes for services rendered, YOU are a criminal.
DN Subscriber 2,The republicans are the ones who relied on low
information voters. The republicans say we can't tax the rich because they
are the job creators. The majority of the jobs that the rich in this country
have created in the last 10 years are either minimum wage jobs or jobs in 3rd
world countries? The takers that the republicans don't want
to talk about are those who take advantage of people who are here illegally and
pay them under the table. The takers are those who pull the plug on their
business in America and take them to sweatshops in a 3rd world country. The
takers are those Americans who made their fortune in America, and now take it
and hide it offshore to avoid paying taxes. The takers are those like the
management of Hostess who drove the company into the ground, but take big
bonuses even as the workers are losing their pensions.If we are
going to talk about takers lets include all of the takers.
Obama is a liar.He promised no tax increases on "middle
america" , yet he will increase tax rates on every American on January 1st
unless the House rejects the PEOPLE'S direction to reject Obama's
policies.Let the chips fall. Let Obama be shown to be a
liar.Let Obama raise taxes on you and me because the HOUSE would not
let him be a dictator.
@Patriot "Any idea what happened in 2007 when the Bush tax cuts were
instituted? The US had its BEST tax revenue year. LOOK IT UP!!! Want to know
why?? What happened when small/medium business got the tax BREAK - they hired
more TAX PAYERS."Really.... so if that were the case, it should
be evidenced in the unemployment numbers- right. Lets see... 2006, unemployment
was 4.6%.... 2007, unemployment was 4.6%.... a year into this "tax
bonaza" and what happens... 2008, unemployment moves UP, not down, to 5.8%.
And the stock market - how did it react... it went from over 13,000 to 8,900.So this wealth and jobs you claim, where were they? Like you
said... LOOK IT UP!!!What caused the bump in taxes? People who had
been holding long term jumped on the opportunity to sell... and we lost
jobs...and equity value. Oh and this little thing called inflation which by
default will have the most current year higher then the past years.
@DN Subscriber 2"We have passed the tipping point, and there are now
more "takers" than "makers" and most politicians (nearly all of
them Democrats) are content to buy votes by robbing makers to pay the
takers."Then why did Romney win 9 of the 10 states (Obama got
Florida) that have the highest percentage of people among the 47%ers? Surely if
Obama really was just winning the takers then he'd have cleaned up in the
south but he got crushed there.Besides, you voted for a guy who
promised you a 20% tax cut. You are a total and complete hypocrite and a moocher
who wants to steal from future generations because you can't be bothered to
pay for the services you currently get.
"@JoeBlow We're talking about Federal Income Taxes. Stop running away
from the problem via non sequitur arguments!"How about following
the threadThe claim"How could taxes go up for 99% of Utah
taxpayers when nearly 50% pay no taxes?"My ResponseTotally
incorrect.Many people pay no Federal Income tax. All working people pay
payroll taxes of 10-15%Here is the issue.Mr Romney pays
under 15% of his earnings in income taxes. He pays ZERO in payroll taxes.Mr Romney and the GOP bash people who pay ZERO income tax however many pay
10-15% payroll tax.Do you really not see how this is germane to the
Thought Utah liked to tout their financial greatness with talk of
"surpluses", "better than every other state" money management.
Not so sure, after all?
Better to fall off the cliff than to have the Obama millstone around our necks.
... if "The president's plan to raise income tax rates on the rich
would return the rates to what they were in the Clinton administration, when the
economy created 23 million jobs, including 267,900 private sector jobs in Utah,
according the White House," then why not just go back to the same rates for
all taxpayers and not just those over $250,000? It seems that the
arguement here is that the Clinton era tax rates delivered prosperity...so
shouldn't everyone pay those rates again?I agree with
others...the although a balanced approach is necessary, all that seems to be
talked about is the tax increase side of the equation...when will the President
pony up his proposals on spending cuts? My fear is that if we pay more in
taxes, it will only result in additional spending.Congress needs to
keep the President honest and require him to commit to real spending cuts. If
he won't, then he will be responsible for the fiscal cliff, we return to
Clinton era rates for all tax payers, and we can expect 1990's style
After all of the charges and counter charges here, there is really only one
basic question to ask: how long will it take President Obama's socialistic
policies to make the U.S. the next Greece?
Reading the comments here, especially from out of state folks really illustrates
the total lack of knowledge of basic economics, and taxes, and government
spending and borrowing.Obama won by appealing to the "low
information" voters, and they clearly bought his lies.We have
passed the tipping point, and there are now more "takers" than
"makers" and most politicians (nearly all of them Democrats) are content
to buy votes by robbing makers to pay the takers. In this circumstance, fixing
the fiscal cliff problem will do nothing, as the related issues are even worse-
unsustainable entitlements, unfunded liabilities, debt too high to ever be
repaid, and a populace that will sacrifice nothing to protect the future of our
country or our children.Sure, Utah will be hurt if we go off the
cliff. And, hurt even worse if the other problems are not fixed.
@JimLynch At what point of prosperity in your own personal life does it become
OK for me to decide that you have enough and that I'm entitled to some of
the fruits of your labor? That threshold doesn't exist, does it? Theft
(government sponsored and otherwise) is ALWAYS morally unethical, period. You
have no claim on the fruits of somebody else's labor.The only
form of taxation that is fair is a flat tax rate paid by everybody.
@JoeBlow We're talking about Federal Income Taxes. Stop running away from
the problem via non sequitur arguments!
@Patriot"Any idea how many SMALL BUSINESS owners fall into the 250k
tax category Timothy - it is the bulk of small to medium business
owners."False, though I shouldn't have expected you to read
Truthseekers' post to know that."Any idea what happened in
2007 when the Bush tax cuts were instituted?"The Bush tax cuts
were instituted years before 2007. Also inflation and population increase is the
prime driver of increased revenue. The non-partisan CBO estimates that what we
got in revenue in 2007 was several hundred billion less than we'd have
gotten without the bush tax cuts in place.@PCRes"ALL of
you liberals who think raising taxes is a reasonable solution to the debt issue,
or any issue for that matter, please take a deep breath and use your
intelligence. Spending IS the ISSUE. "We advocate a balanced
approach that includes revenue increases (since revenue as % of GDP is at its
lowest point in over half a century) and spending cuts (since spending as % of
GDP is at its highest point in over half a century). We have problems with both
spending and revenue.
@christoph That isn't true! Tax increases will always have a negative
impact on the economy, which is why Obama didn't raise them two years ago.
The reason that the tax increase in the 90s worked to reduce the deficit is
because Bill Clinton, and George Bush before him, were more fiscally responsible
than Obama. Clinton reduced welfare spending significantly, for example. Obama
wants to increase spending drastically. Also, Bill Clinton had the advent of
the Internet going for him, so about the most you can claim is that Bill
Clinton's tax increases weren't as harmful as they might have been.
To claim that they caused the financial growth of the 90s is naive. Obama
claims that the good times of the 90s were a result of Clinton's tax
policies, and that is an out and out lie. Winston Churchill said it best.
"We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man
standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
lost in DC don't forget to include GE and the several thousand millionaires
who paid no taxes in the group with lucrative tax rates.
I wish with all of my heart that the federal government would just shut down,
for good. We wouldn't have to worry about tax cut extensions, because there
wouldn't be any taxes to cut, there would be no IRS goon squad to collect
them or throw people in jail for not paying, and there would be no corrupt
politicians living large in Washington while I and other Utahns keep sending
them money while we ourselves struggle to pay our own bills. I'm tired of
this. Will you guys in Washington just leave us Utah folk alone? Go over the
cliff, and leave us out of it.
Oh my goodness, Now I am a socialist Obama disciple..Sounds like a childish
personal attack to me but one does have to consider the source..Maybe I am
residing in OZ but I seem to recall that after growing up in an isolated fishing
community on the Outer Banks of North Carolina I became someone else than is
being portrayed(this is in rebuttal to my alleged tendencies)..Four years in the
U.S. Navy(including 11 months in south-east Asia)and then almost 25 years as a
commercial fisherman,owning my own boats and gear,employing many individuals,and
along the way paying lots of taxes and operating fees...Kind of reeks of free
enterprise capitalism to me..Maybe it was the voyages to my forebears homeland
in Europe that turned me to the dark side of socialism..One can only
wonder..Once again,unfettered wealth hardly ever trickles down..The rich hide
it in offshore accounts(much like a recent presidential candidate)and live off
the interest..It sort of sounds like some of the posters here are not happy with
their circumstances and probably never will be..
We're talking about taxes rather than spending because Mr. Obama WANTS it
that way and the state run media control the discussion.No matter
WHAT happens with the goofballs in D.C. the middle class will wind up paying off
the debt. Sorry, even if we tax the millionaires at 98% rate it wouldn't
pay off our debts.BTW- has Obama said anything about cutting
anything? I know he decided he doesn't want any oversight with the debt
ceiling. Does that mean he wants to just make up a budget as he goes along;
subject to campaign donors approval of course.
The economy runs on the movement of dollars. You buy a product and that creates
a sales position, a manufacturing job, transportation (trucking) job and each of
those people do the same. That creates jobs. The dollars flow through the
economy. This engine is fuled by the middle class and the disadvantaged to the
best of their ability.The $250K and above do buy products and
services too, but much of the 'disposable' income go into the stock
market, offshore accounts or other financial instruments. The dollars are
removed from circulation. The fact that Capital Gains is taxed only 15% if not
reinvested bleeds revenue from the economy. The stock market is not investing
for jobs, simply exchanging paper between people now. Those dollars are out of
circulation and suppress the economy. The real investment creating jobs were
bought years ago for the real investment I think the answer is let
the tax gift expire for all and let the new Congress make the changes.
Government spends because they have the funds. They hire people because they
have the funds to program more jobs and add even more jobs to justify the people
they have hired to do the more programs that they have made. It is a never
ending circle that keeps on increasing in radius, diameter and circumference.
The ends justifies the means in government and bureaucracy. The federal
government increases their partnership to the states and the states either spend
it or lose it. If the states don't spend the federal money, then the state
potentially criticized for not being at least as effective as the federal
program. No one wants to be the one that doesn't hire a new person to
continue on the circle of self-aggrandizement. If you hold back on salary
increases, employees will complain that you are not giving them their fair
share. As a state partner with the federal programs, employees can file a
complaint with the federal monitors and then the review process starts once
again. The federal people like that part as it gives them more justification
for monitoring state programs.The Governor knew of the potential
Why are we talking about taxes? The problem is SPENDING! Cut the spending
$10 Trillion over 10 years, and then we can talk about taxes. With the
so-called Bush tax cuts in place - I say so-called because they are the rates
before Clinton raised the rates in the 90's - revenues to the government
were never higher. Spending is the problem - defense, SS, Medicare, other
entitlements, waste, foreign payments, all of it. Cut that! (and before
anyone says that the economy did well in the 90's with higher taxes -
Clinton had the good luck of the greatest economic boom ever driven by high
tech; we'll not be that lucky again in our lifetimes)
"How could taxes go up for 99% of Utah taxpayers when nearly 50% pay no
taxes?"Totally incorrect.Many people pay no Federal
Income tax. All working people pay payroll taxes of 10-15%As well
at sales tax, property tax etc.
They knew this was coming and did nothing. A leader would have tried to head
this off. The so called leader we have did nothinng as he is not a leader. Obama
wants this so called going over the cliff to happen. He would get his tax
increases, He would get slashing the defense budget, He could blame the
Republicans, and after innaguration ride in on a white horse and propose middle
class tax cuts. This is a win win for him. He is all about Obama and nothing
about the Country. Believe it.
This tax "increase" is simply returning the tax rates to where they were
in the 1990s. Were those bad years? Don't think so. It was always
Bush's plan to have his tax cuts expire so let 'em expire. As far as
the $250K and small business goes, remember that that is $250K of PROFIT. Any
small business that makes in profit $250K can afford a few bucks more in taxes.
The Utah delegation is on the side of obstruction and non-compromise. The state
of Utah should just send them the bill for damages.
PCRes,Hows is this for intelligence.How about we trim
spending. And any meaningful spending cuts must begin with the largest spending
categories. Some from SSSome from Medicare and medicaidsome from defenseThen we cut a few deductions. Maybe we stop
giving tax credits to oil companies. Then we raise tax rates from the
lowest levels in 60 years.We will not fix the problem by focusing on
one single area. It is immensely obvious to me, and to most."Some of us already pay 50% of what we make" That is something
that I cannot believe. You may want to talk to Mr Romney.Under
Reagan, the top tax rates were mostly around 50%. We hear constantly about the
prosperity and job creation under him. Why was 50% GREAT under
Reagan, but 40% is socialistic under Obama.The great mystery.Oh, and Corporate taxes? Effective, repeat EFFECTIVE corporate tax
rates are the lowest in history.
How could taxes go up for 99% of Utah taxpayers when nearly 50% pay no taxes?
Let government go over the "fiscal cliff," maybe voters would then wake
up and stop placing their "hope" in the government. Utah's economy
should be independent and not depend on the fed anyway.
unbelievable...ALL of you liberals who think raising taxes is a reasonable
solution to the debt issue, or any issue for that matter, please take a deep
breath and use your intelligence. Spending IS the ISSUE. Making millions of
people depend on a free ride from someone else is the essence of this entire
problem. We need to allow you to pay more if you like. Some of us already pay
50% of what we make...what is fair or wise in this equation? Raise our taxes and
we are going to lay off more people and spend less. Watch what that does for
your socialist welfare program...good luck.
Taxes were raised in the 1990's and it made the rich become richer; a lot
of money was made in the 1990's. We haven't had many tax increases
in ten years; this article could also mention the good it will do: pay down
debt. Yes, we should also reform tax code and medicaid and medicare.
A lot of contradictions and misunderstanding already and letting this bush
program expire is one of the best things to happen to the economy and SSA,
medicare, and medicaid. With the expiration of the plan people will be paying
more SSA taxes, medicare, and medicaid premiums without even have to create any
more tax laws to fund these programs being depleted by our president and
congress.Its best for the country to let this plan expire put a
crunch on state government expectations of pork funding the state government and
legislators chose to enact laws and programs as permanent dependents of
temporary funding, then they deserves this painful and unpopular task of putting
some priorities and caps on state funded aid programs.Now face the
citizens of Utah for neglegence and fraudulent actions knowing the consequences.
Welfare programs should be declared temporary with a cap and time limit they can
be used by individuals or family, it should not be a permanent escalating cost
or expense of the tax payers.And who will be forced to suffer this
loss of federal aid? The taxpayers, or private business & UTA the governor
promised payment of billions of dollars from welfare funds?
Timothy,Lucrative tax rates? Those who pay NO federal income taxes are the
ones who have lucrative tax rates. That is about 47% of us. The "uber
wealthy" are about the only ones PAYING taxes. That does not seem lucrative
re:TruthseekerAny idea what happened in 2007 when the Bush tax cuts
were instituted? The US had its BEST tax revenue year. LOOK IT UP!!! Want to
know why?? What happened when small/medium business got the tax BREAK - they
hired more TAX PAYERS. Get it?? It's called capitalism. Of course your
socialist model is built on the wealth redistribution model and what a model it
is - look no further than Greece. You can tax the rich at 100% if you like and
the ONLY thing that goes up is unemployment. These are freshman college
economics facts Truthseeker and I honestly think you know better. Answer me this
- why in beginning of 2011 when the economy was lock step what it is today with
unemployment numbers and supper slow qtrly growth did Bill Clinton AND Barack
Obama say that raising taxes would increase unemployment? Now here we are less
than 2 years later and now it is Ok to raise taxes? Huh??? The reason has
nothing to do with economics and everything to do with socialist ideology to
attack success and redistribute wealth. Watch what happens to unemployment as
taxes are raised over the next 2 years. Ugly!
If were just the Obama zombies and the rest of socialist America that had to
suffer from Obama-nomics I would say knock yourself out - you get what you
deserve. However it is the actual working and taxing paying Americans that will
suffer the most - the ones who are supporting the rest of welfare bums and that
is what is so unfair. America will be drained by the do-nothings and once the
250k and above crowd have been drained then Barack will lower the bar to include
the 100k and above crowd and suddenly they will become the evil rich.... and so
on down to 75k and 50k etc... This is exactly how communism works and liberal
Americans are too ignorant to even know what is happening to their country and
Utah's chief economist? How about Utah's chief alarmist?
White House wants, according to Secretary Geithner, if they don’t get
their way."If the majority of the senate vote for something
they're supposed to get their way. Republicans have been
blocking the majority with filibusters for 4 years. Let's not talk about
"not getting your way", especially when so many republicans want to
succeed from the union as a result of the presidential election.
The Bush tax cuts would not have passed without an expiration date. The
deficits created by the tax cuts will keep adding to the debt. Obama
compromised when Republicans won in 2010 and extended all the tax cuts for
another 2 years. Time for Republicans to compromise. As for
"small businesses being hurt:"In 2011, the Treasury
Department’s Office of Tax Analysis took a more in-depth look at the issue
using a more realistic definition of “small business” and it shows
that more than 90 percent of small-business owners wouldn’t be affected by
Obama’s proposal to raise taxes on individuals making over $200,000 and
couples making over $250,000. Moreover, about 80 percent of those who would be
affected by the tax increase are not small-business owners.Only 8
percent of small-business owners have income of $200,000 or more. So 92 percent
of small-business owners wouldn’t be affected by Obama’s proposal.
Why is it stunning and irresponsible to tell the truth..President Obama has said
repeatedly,for well over a year,that he is not going to sign anything that
involves allowing the uber-wealthy to retain their lucrative tax rates..Contrary
to what many say,this wealth does not trickle down to create jobs and
opportunities for the working class..Well,maybe Maserati and Porsche dealers..If
it goes over the cliff it goes over..We will all be paying more taxes,including
the rich that Republicans are protecting..At any rate,if it happens,Utahans will
have only themselves to blame..They elected quite a few of these uncompromising
political zealots and in my view they deserve what they get..