|
LookieNoNookie -> RE: GOP may OK tax increase that Obama hopes to block (8/23/2011 7:18:13 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Charles6682
The GOP once again shows its 2 face self again.So,they are all for tax breaks for the very wealthy but are against tax breaks that would benefit 46% of the population?Typical Republicans.I don't see how any human being with an ounce of morals would vote for modern day Republicans.There are a few "moderate" Republicans out there and they are fine with me.However,the majority of Republicans only care about their rich donors.Republicans had no problem holding this country hostage when it came to extending the "Bush tax cuts" for thier rich buddies.I have nothing against those who are rich.They create jobs.I just find it insane that Republicans wuld be fighting tax breaks that benefit so many and yet are all for tax breaks that benefit so few.
Charles, while I did read your entire comment, I didn't need to, to be in a position to explain something very important (to you...and anyone else willing to listen):
They're all the same.
Dems want to raise taxes (which will cause lesser income for everyone, but give the feds all the more cash to set up jobs programs). Repubs want to lower, or eliminate taxes (or so they say) giving YOU more money to spend (ostensibly, so you'll go out and spend money, creating jobs).
They're all the same....and it's the same math regardless of how you look at/approach it.
It makes no difference who you vote for....if you vote for a dem or a repub.....
Although, I will add, you're correct in one aspect....Republicans want to hold down taxes for everyone....including the "super" wealthy.
Now, ultimately, the question is....who are those folks?
Warren Buffet certainly comes to mind....Bill Gates is another....there's a few 100 others that fit in their class, maybe even as many as 300, but truly, not a whole lot more than that.
And, how much will adding a higher tax rate add to the whole collection (of taxes) aspect?
All things being equal....not a whole lot.
But it's a start. And most of these "super" wealthy are eager to pay more. Why don't they?
Why don't you?
You have that option you know?
Where the bigger problem is...is that, well over 50% of taxpayers....pay nothing.
Surely there are many who don't make enough, using any accountants expertise, to pay anything.
But should they get something back?
(Many do).
So, the question then that comes to the fore is....who should pay, who should pay how much, how much is too much and at what point do we exceed fairness, disallowing those with greater gifts (the ability to make money/create jobs) to do their thing?
We all know someone who can paint still life's better than we can (with at best, our stick man abilities). We all know someone who was born with a silver spoon, but think honestly for a second.....how many of those still have that silver spoon 10 years hence?
If they do, at least holding even, 10 years hence, what they were given...that's actually fairly impressive.
More impressive, of course are those who started with nothing....and end up with a silver spoon.
Anyone that's made a few million from scratch deserves all of my, and every one of your...praise. They're amazing people...and in the process (most) created jobs.
Regardless....there are those who argue for a vastly higher rate for the "wealthy" (whatever that actually means). Several of the super wealthy are publicly arguing for the federal government to do exactly that....indeed, they're actually begging the federal government to charge them more.
I think that's a great concept, and while I'm not even remotely what anyone might call super wealthy....I do better than 97% of the general population...and I also wouldn't disagree (remember...I'm one of those filthy Republicans out to steal everything you have through lower tax rates, including your baby's food) in the slightest if I was charged a higher rate....if I could be certain of 2 things...and only these 2:
1) That the feds would write an impregnable law that stated that they couldn't spend any more than 95% of what they TOOK in last year, putting, without question, that additional 5% towards either a savings account that was UNTOUCHABLE for ANY reason.....or.....
2) That some law could be contrived (maybe a national sales tax or some such) that required everyone to pay SOMETHING.
(Preferably both).
In either case, using that money (since they wouldn't be allowed to spend more than above proscribed) to either pay down the debt, or build up our reserves (which ultimately ends in the same result).
And there you have it Charles....from one of those filthy capitalist pigs, who only wants to see poor people pay taxes.
(Things...moreover, people.....ain't always as they appear to be).
At some point there needs to be some give and take....and we gotta quit giving to those who only want to take, and we gotta start taking from those who refuse to give (anything).
And that's what I'm fucking sticking to Charles.
(So there....dammit!).
|
|
|
|
