Why not? As Bill Kristol pointed out today, almost all of the people (not all) are blue-state liberals and work in industries or areas that support Obama, so why not give them what they want? Heck, let’s give them 50% top marginal rates if they so desire.
Let’s keep the cuts on the middle and upper-middle class. Let’s broaden the tax base so that more Americans pay something. The rest can come from cuts in spending to balance the budget.
Why?
Why not?
bc
Because not “ALL” of us live in Blue states, and NOT “ALL” of us voted for it. :blink::blink:
As a business owner that employs people that would not be affected by the rape that you speak of, I can assure you, with certainty, that raising taxes on those that earn $250k+ would have the exact opposite effect than what is needed in this country (MORE JOBS). Couple that with Obamacare = double digit unemployment = less revenue for gov = less money for entitlements + more people on entitlements = more taking from job producers= even less jobs = even les revenue = and eventual, and inevitable collapse…
Less talk of taking from others and more talk and action of helping job creators creat more jobs is the answer.
If what we need is jobs (and it is) then the answer is not punishing job creators.
Point fingers at whomever you care to, the fact remains we spent a shit load of money we didn’t have, wrote checks we couldn’t cash, and ran up one hell of a debt. Now it’s time to pay the piper.
That means higher taxes, reduced government programs, entitlement reforms with reduced benefits and means testing, and reduced defense spending until we get our fiscal house in order.
Bitter medicine? You bet. So shut up and swallow.
I hate the whole loathing of the rich that is soo popular. Jealousy is ugly, But has anyone ever seen any reputable evidence(as in,not a crazy breibart article) that shows that trickle down economics is a job creator, and exactly how it does this?
Well over 1 trillion dollar yearly deficits. Everyone’s taxes need to go up as well as getting rid of all the deductions and credits.
Taxing the rich isn’t going to come CLOSE to getting the deficit to what it was even under Bush let alone balancing the budget.
The fact that we’ve had a decade of the Bush tax cuts, lax regulation of Wall Street, the lowest interest rates in forever which would seem to encourage business investment to achieve at least some reasonable rate of return, and additional payroll tax holidays leaves one to ask … where’s the beef?
Oh, right, I forgot. The argument is always the same. We just need to cut taxes more, abolish capital gains taxes, etc. Gimme, gimme, gimme and yet the payoff never comes.
The only “trickle down” is from the guy pissing on my back and telling me it’s raining.
Bill Kristol is a Neocon POS.
They are all sitting on cash not wanting to risk anything, I guess. Not a ‘Wall Street’ fan but I do read and subscribe to WSJ…
Yup. I tune him out every time I see him. He adds nothing of value.
Please, no more taxes, we can’t afford to pay for $2000 water fountains anymore. :fie:
I say if your going to tax the rich then make the entitlement class give up the same percentage from their “Benefits”.
A bit off the top and just a little bit off the bottom and throw in some sensible spending cuts for good measure and just maybe we can slow the bleeding.
The entitlement class is where the Libs get all their votes and the only contribution they could make is mass suicide.
While I’m not for any additional taxes on anyone, the above statement is sane and fair.
The poor vs rich stuff that’s been going around this country is an absolutely travesty. We are all in this (s@&$ storm) together at this point, and if we are going to get out if it, it’s going to have to be so together, any thing less isn’t going to help.
IMO
The age group that voted for Mitt in the biggest percentage were elderly, age 65 and up, who are taking the biggest chunk of the pie via SS and Medicare.
I think capital gains taxes are evil. You have paid the top marginal rate on your income, then when you invest it, post tax, you pay again on the money you earn. Evil.
Evil.
How do you know what we need is more jobs? Maybe we need less spending and a net outflow of population.
(I’m just saying that your argument needs some more work, bro.)
Because until we can create compelling arguments around these topics, we aren’t going to win anymore national elections…
bc
Exactly. Go back to the Clinton era spending levels (adjusted to inflation) and then we can go back to Clinton era tax rates. This is one of those rare times that we agree.
Because full employment is 4%. You will close the deficit much faster if you employ people rather than shrink the potential tax base with self-deportation. Besides, where are people going to go? We are still the nicest house in a shitty neighborhood.
When America is fully employed, we bring in plenty of revenue. For example, our greatest year of revenue was in 2007 under the Bush Tax Cuts. Granted, some of that was revenue from inflated capital gains caused by artificially low interest rates. However, the point is that our situation is correctable with a gradual reduction in spending along with smart deregulation of the big job killers such as DF and Obamacare. You can raise taxes and it will not crash the economy or meaningfully help or deficit/debt.
Meh, not buying it. The majority of the population doesn’t pay income tax. You can create all the non-tax paying jobs you want and it won’t move the needle on the deficit.
Canada has gun control, socialized medicine and high marginal rates. They have higher employment rates than we do.
Until we broaden the tax base it won’t work - so why not raise the rates on all income levels first?
bc
Yes, everyone should have skin in the game. All income should be taxed and not loopholed back as a refund.
If we need money, we need money. Taxes up some, a lot of spending cuts. Period.
The cuts have to be bigger, obviously, as you can not mathematically tax your way in to a surplus.