It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Calls for Highest Sustained Taxation in U.S. History

page: 2
41
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Obama can call for whatever he wants to call for but it doesn't matter because he can't force a future Congress to do anything.




posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 08:27 AM
link   
Why can't we just tax wall street transactions 1%?
The amount of money traded every day massive. I remember hearing something like 4 quadrillion dollars a year.
If you tax one cent out of every dollar, that just one dollar out of every hundred, the national debt would be erased in one or two years.
"They" do not want that though. The national debt is too good of a propaganda tool to let it go.
I believe a (small) bi-partisan effort was started to tax wall street .004% and it was shot down because it would
"collapse the economy."
What a load of bull. The more (imaginary)debt they pile on, the more they can control the masses with their b/s "collapse the economy" garbage
That's my national debt solution



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: snarky412


He's nothing but a pathological liar!!!!!!


That's just another way of saying, "He's a politician!"

I've been saying for a while now that the people need to vote EVERY single incumbent out of office, every single one. Perhaps that would send a message. The next step would be to impose term limits on congress. Get them on the same health plans as the peons they supposedly represent. Do away with the two party system. Give each candidates equal time for commercials. Don't allow corporations to donate to campaigns, put campaign donation limits without work arounds. Get rid of super PACs. There are so many things wrong with American politics.

Sadly, will never happen though.

Heck, our last two presidents have been terrible, and they've both been reelected.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
What is pretty funny is none of you have any idea what this number even means do you? You some how think that the tax vs GDP ratio means more tax income or higher taxes. Here are years where it was higher that the numbers in the article. Taxes percent of GDP 1981: 19.6 percent 1982: 19.2 percent 1997: 19.2 percent 1998: 19.9 percent 1999: 19.8 percent 2000: 20.6 percent 2001: 19.5 percent.

So in those years were we suddenly being taxed more than anytime in our history as well? No. Because you can not compair the numbers like that. Population growth and the value of the dollar both distort those numbers massively and anyone who has ever has an economics class can tell you that trying to compare them straight up is like compairing the cost of oranges in 1945 to 2014 with out measuring any other variables.

Corporate tax rates that were nearly 50% in the 40s have fallen to 10% now. Taxes on people on the lowest tax bracket have fallen from 23% in 40s to 10% now. Taxes on the people in the highest tax bracket have fallen the most from over 90% in 40s to over 70% from 50s till 1982 when they dropped to 50% till now they are 39%.

The fact is since the late 80s when cutting taxes became political weapon by both parties we have slashed the percent of income taxes that each person and comany pays. Of course that does not mean tax revenue dropped to their lowest ever because of things like increased taxable revenue from people and companies, the value of the dollar, population (the increased number of tax payers) etc. As you can see above the years of some of the highest tax vs GDP numbers since WW2 are also years tax rates were at their lowest since before WW2.

In other words as fun as it is to toss around raw numbers and try and compare them like the mean something the fact is they do not.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

Did some math. According to NYSE

There is $8.9762 Trillion traded last year on the NYSE alone. That would be $89.762 Billion in taxes paid. Now imagine that, plus all the derivatives (where the BIG money is traded).
Around 30 other countries have a tax similar to what I'm saying here



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

Well let's see who was really against that idea.

The Democrats had enough control of all Congressional Committees in 2009/2010.

They had no problem passing Obama.Care either.

No Republicans voted in favor of Obama.Care.

Now, who didn't buy that tax Wall.Street theory?

Hmmm.

The ultra-Left, ultra-Progressive agenda is Wall.Street's friend.

Somebody's got hoodwinked bigtime.




edit on Apr-22-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Thank you... I don't know how much of a response you'll get here in the mud pit, but you are dead right.

*sigh*



Anyway. It is an awesome post and you explained it perfectly. Kudos.

- AB



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
H.R. 1579
HR 1579 is the latest attempt to do what I'm talking about.
HR 880
HR 880 is similar. From early 2013
You can look at the summary and co-sponsors of the bill there if you want.
BTW I'm not sure if your "hoodwinked" comment is for something I said, but I have never claimed any political allegiance on ATS.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

Oh boo hoo. We have billionaires throwing money at politicians like it is candy. I don't care. Can't get blood from a turnip, so guess who is next. People with incomes over 80k, the oligarchy is coming for what you have now.
edit on 22-4-2014 by MOMof3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: xuenchen
H.R. 1579
HR 1579 is the latest attempt to do what I'm talking about.
HR 880
HR 880 is similar. From early 2013
You can look at the summary and co-sponsors of the bill there if you want.
BTW I'm not sure if your "hoodwinked" comment is for something I said, but I have never claimed any political allegiance on ATS.


Not suggesting anything about you.

The point is why they didn't do this in 2009?

What's changed since then to make it OK now and not then?



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
I wouldn't doubt if people tried, but just like a lot of other bills that have the potential to help the public, it does not move.
HR 880 was introduced over a year ago and is still at stage one, just like 1579, witch was introduced was earlier this month.
Something like this absolutely needs to happen though. The working class people should not be on the hook for bankers and politicians destroying the country. Any president would come of as a hero in the eye of John Q. Public if they could pull it off.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

The only thing that makes sense to me is that most of those who voted for the liar in Chief must be on welfare and they'll never have to pay anyway...And the way the economy is going, neither will their children...



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

I see where you're coming from, but this is what I've read.


In the twelve fiscal years preceding the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (1930 through 1941), federal taxation averaged 5.3 percent of GDP.

In the five fiscal years encompassing U.S. involvement in World War II (1942 through 1946), federal taxation averaged 16.1 percent of GDP.

In the fiscal years since World War II (1947 through 2013), federal taxation has averaged 17.1 percent of GDP.

In the period from fiscal 1992 through 2001, federal taxes averaged 18.3 percent of GDP. But in the last four years of that period (1998 through 2001), the federal budget was in balance.

In the twelve fiscal years from 2002 through 2013, federal taxes averaged 16.1 percent of GDP—the same that they averaged during World War II. However, the federal government ran deficits in each of those twelve years.

In all ten years from 2015 through 2024, under Obama's proposal, federal taxes would be higher than 18.3 percent of GDP. During the period of 1992 through 2011, there were only five straight years (1997-2001) when federal taxes were higher than 18.3 percent of GDP.

Now let's Re-Read the Most important Sentence Here, Shall We and Yes, this Taxation effects every American.


America has never been subjected to a ten-year stretch of taxation at that level.



While adding that $7.183 trillion to the debt held by the public, Obama would increase taxes by $1.4 trillion, said the CBO report.

“The President’s budget would make a number of changes to the tax law,”

Who May I ask, Is The Public?


President Barack Obama called for what would be the highest level of sustained taxation ever imposed on the American people,

Link
How do we pay this debt?


Paying off the debt is largely a political choice. Who
bears the cost of paying off the debt? Is it government
workers through lower pay and lower benefits? Is
it individuals who see a reduction in government
services or entitlements, either directly through cuts
or indirectly through slower growth in benefits?
Is it taxpayers who pay higher taxes and fees? Are
the additional taxes born by the rich or the poor or
both? Is it bondholders who get paid back in inflated
currency or don’t get paid back at all?


Inflate your way out of the debt. If the inflation
rate is high enough, nominal GDP can grow faster
than the deficit reducing the debt/GDP ratio


Just as the purpose of running a deficit is to hide the
cost of government services and expenditures through
indirect taxation (inflation tax) or delaying the costs
(issuing bonds), so the goal of the government in
paying down the debt will be to make the cost as
indirect as possible, or to impose the costs on those
without political power


The burden of government debt is born by
government employees, taxpayers and bondholders.
Above all, politics determines who bears the costs.
With low interest rates or economic growth,
politicians can continue to run deficits. Above
all, politics determines who bears the costs of the
government’s debt. The interest groups with the
least political influence are the ones who will pay
the price.

Looks Like I Got My Answer, One Way Or The Other, We Pay!!!!
Global Financial



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
Why can't we just tax wall street transactions 1%?
The amount of money traded every day massive. I remember hearing something like 4 quadrillion dollars a year.


I don't know what the big corporations get taxed, or what their lawyers get them out of, but I believe the tax rate for income made on the stock market is in the neighborhood of 25%. Technically I should know this, beings I trade every day, and it's technically my job now, but I'm fairly certain it's in that range. Obviously, the more you make, the more you have to pay. That's just the minimum. I think the highest tax bracket is like 35%, or something like that.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: guohua

Oh boo hoo. We have billionaires throwing money at politicians like it is candy. I don't care. Can't get blood from a turnip, so guess who is next. People with incomes over 80k, the oligarchy is coming for what you have now.


No one is next, Obama has already destroyed the American Middle Class Family, Their Gone.


The American middle class, long the most affluent in the world, has lost that distinction.

While the wealthiest Americans are outpacing many of their global peers, a New York Times analysis shows that across the lower- and middle-income tiers, citizens of other advanced countries have received considerably larger raises over the last three decades.

After-tax middle-class incomes in Canada — substantially behind in 2000 — now appear to be higher than in the United States. The poor in much of Europe earn more than poor Americans.

The NY Times

The future Family of America.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: guohua

No, that happened when they took the one voice the working man has. Unions. Turned it into dirty word instead of respecting the fight and blood that went into keeping corporations from sucking the life out of the working human.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

What I am saying is to tax the transactions themselves, not the money earned by traders at the end of the day.
Capitol gains tax is what it sounds like you are talking about.



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

What I am saying is to tax the transactions themselves, not the money earned by traders at the end of the day.
Capitol gains tax is what it sounds like you are talking about.


Yeah, it's hard enough making money in the markets as it is. They already charge us a fee for each transaction. It sounds to me like you're trying to find a way to get out of the debt without you personally having to pay for any of it. I think we should go back and tally up all the people who voted for obama, and make them pay for it.
edit on 22-4-2014 by JohnnySasaki because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnySasaki

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

What I am saying is to tax the transactions themselves, not the money earned by traders at the end of the day.
Capitol gains tax is what it sounds like you are talking about.


Yeah, it's hard enough making money in the markets as it is. They already charge us a fee for each transaction. It sounds to me like you're trying to find a way to get out of the debt without you personally having to pay for any of it. I think we should go back and tally up all the people who voted for obama, and make them pay for it.





I think we should go back and tally up all the people who voted for obama, and make them pay for it.


I Starred You and I Wish i Could Just Keep On give You Stars!!

Charge Every Last One Of Those Idiots $10. to $100. for the 2008 Disaster and their 2012 Disaster!
Damn,,,,JohnnySasaki For President!!!!!!



posted on Apr, 22 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: guohua

originally posted by: JohnnySasaki

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: JohnnySasaki

What I am saying is to tax the transactions themselves, not the money earned by traders at the end of the day.
Capitol gains tax is what it sounds like you are talking about.


Yeah, it's hard enough making money in the markets as it is. They already charge us a fee for each transaction. It sounds to me like you're trying to find a way to get out of the debt without you personally having to pay for any of it. I think we should go back and tally up all the people who voted for obama, and make them pay for it.






I think we should go back and tally up all the people who voted for obama, and make them pay for it.


I Starred You and I Wish i Could Just Keep On give You Stars!!

Charge Every Last One Of Those Idiots $10. to $100. for the 2008 Disaster and their 2012 Disaster!
Damn,,,,JohnnySasaki For President!!!!!!


Lol, why thank you kind sir. I returned the favor.
I just call it like I see it.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join