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.

 

Most Americans Want Tax Cuts for Country's Wealthiest to End

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 

I can't answer that. If I was Obama answering that I would spin it like he does jobs numbers "saved or created".

In other words, maybe the prices didn't rise as much as they would have without the tax cuts.

I'm being facetious of course.

I’m not saying not to let the cuts expire, but if you think it will come out of the CEO’s pockets in the end, you are really living in a dream world. You know where those taxes will come from… come on….I know you can look deep inside yourself for the truth as much as you hate it to be true. The CEOs will continue to make fortunes no matter what. Whatever you do to their business will be a “they are rubber and we are glue” situation.

Now, with that said, what do we do? I don’t have the answer to be honest. I know one thing though, this $250k number is way too low. That will hit local and small business owners all day long and will affect the little guy. If you don’t believe that talk to some small business owners. I know they are mostly conservatives and probably not in your circle of friends but find a guy who owns 3 macdonalds and I bet he grosses over 250 but makes a modest wage by the time he reinvests capital into buying a 4th which….tada…employs more people!





edit on 16-9-2010 by JonInMichigan because: bas typos




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Erasurehead
 


Well then, we should pray that they restore the Federal income tax rate to pre-1913 levels.....


Wait! No! It's all supposed to rewind to somewhere before 1865 and properly "evolve" from that point.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

The majority of Republicans (57%) think it’s a bad idea




And they spend all their time on ATS trying to make it look like their views are the norm, just like the UK edl posters trying to persuade all and sundry that their views are common.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad
When those tax cuts were made the theory was the rich would spend more, start more buisness, and hire more people. Of course none of that happened.


Uh huh.

"Ttrickle down" economics obviously doesn't work.

Time to try some "trickle up" economics, dontcha think?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
If you raise taxes on the wealthy business owners do you think they will just let it cut into their profits? Of course not. They will either layoff enough workers to make up for the tax increase or increase the price of the product or service their business provides passing the cost down the the consumer.

If you work in the private sector you are working for rich people. They are providing a living for you.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by JonInMichigan
 


Perhaps you think my "circle" is a bunch of hippies that never shower or use deodorant. That couldn't be farther from the truth; there's more to me than I let on here (that's for the best IMHO). Even some of the wealthy support this because they know they have far more than they need. They know they have to contribute back significantly for there to be any stability. But to know that, you'd have to know them personally and see them out of the public eye to know who they really are.

Then, there are those that are about greed and accumulation at the expense of others, predatory through and through. Whatever they get they can enjoy for awhile but the system will eventually expell them because they play a key role in creating the conditions that demand they be kept in check. No amount of propaganda about floating the boat from the gunwale will conceal the reality once it impacts the everyday life of regular people.

We had a family business that was quite prosperous before any of the tax cuts; some of its best years in fact.

The CEOs that wish to price their crap out of the market so noone can afford it can go ahead and do just that. Someone else just may decide it's a bad idea to take that approach. My guess is nothing will radically change as far as prices and the CEOs will have some thinking to do on whether they need the 50-footer or the 80-footer. The conditioning has worked to make you believe jobs will be lost disaster looms if things are restored to prior levels. These CEOs you talk about depend on your continued compliance.

Note: Just to open a McDonald's franchise, last time I looked on their own site, you have to have a million dollars net worth.


edit on 9/16/2010 by EnlightenUp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Seeing as how almost all of our politicians leave office as millionaires/billionaires, will this renewed tax also include them or are they again exempt from paying at least their share, or will we see them side step their obligations. They talk as if this tax will only affect everyone but them -- otherwise they would be more hesitant to offer up this solution. Will these officials refuse their automatic raises for a time in order to help the country? Perhaps we should arrest these congressmen and confiscate their assets to spread the wealth even more. Gore, Pelosi, Rangle, etc, will be able to pay for most of the health care needed by the "poor" on just their incomes/assets. I hear the administration preach about volunteering, but they only volunteer for the cameras. Our government wants everyone (but them) to tighten their belts and shoulder the burden. I have not had lobster in many, many years. What about you?_javascript:icon('
')



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
I always thought it was just rude and not polite
to ask what someone pays in taxes or
brag about how much or little you/them pay.
But I guess when you are failing in the budget it is
just better to let the people argue about their fair share
and do nothing about the problem.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


I really like your avitar.

I am a long haired pagan hippie... but unlike all my hippie friends I have a education, job, and 180 degree opposite political views (they love their free 'bama bucks). So yeah, guess I jumped to a conclusion there, sorry.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by JonInMichigan
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


I really like your avitar.


Thank you.


I am a long haired pagan hippie...


Hehe...some things are similar, more than I've mentioned. Rainy day we're having, eh?


...but unlike all my hippie friends I have a education, job, and 180 degree opposite political views (they love their free 'bama bucks). So yeah, guess I jumped to a conclusion there, sorry.


I'd rather they have their "free 'bama bucks" so long as it keeps them from worse and they act more-or-less respectably.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
The word "taxes" is right up there with all the really bad words.

Of course "taxes" are bad. But like death, they're not going away.

...So why fight for the right of the rich to avoid taxes, which leaves the poor to carry the load? [Given that the "middle class" has all but disappeared.]


22 Statistics That Prove The Middle Class Is Being Systematically Wiped Out Of Existence In America

The Middle Class in America Is Radically Shrinking. Here Are the Stats to Prove it

7 reasons on why the middle class disappearing

Middle Class Struggles for Survival - ABC News

America Without a Middle Class

Hunger hits Detroit's middle class



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bushido Kanji
For those of you who believe in Democracy, you should pay attention to this story. Most Americans do in fact believe the rich should be taxed as much as, if not more than, everyone else. Since most Americans would want this to be true, why isn't it happening? Don't the people have a voice? Aren't they represented?

If this was true Democracy, the people should be able to put this to a vote, which we know how that would pan out. It wont happen, though. The people refuse to speak their voice.


According to the IRS, the richest, which make up 1% of the population pays 40.4% of the taxes. 60.6% of the taxes are paid by the top 3.5%.
Who is paying taxes?-

If there would be a flat tax, at 10% which some believe would be fair to all, our nation would fall farther behind in its deficit and the richest would really have the biggest tax break on record. If the entire population could pay the same as the rich, we could pull ourselves out of debt but the working class wouyld have to choose between eating or having a home.

I don't think it's a matter of what the rich or poor are paying in taxes. It's more of a matter of a large percentage of our Congress getting paid to do a shoddy job while friviously spending existing taxes in a carefree manner.

Our elected officials are already wealthy business people. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay them a salary. It's not like they need a job. They chose to run for office and they make promises to the people that they'll make things better. It's not like they need the money. I'm not saying they can't have parties. I'm just saying that their private parties shouldn't be paid by public funds. I'm not saying that they have to foot the bill for their official trips but why does the taxpayer have to foot the bill for an entire staff?

The rich already pay way more than their fair share with the tax cuts in place. I'm stepping out to get some fresh air before I make a wreck of this keyboard.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 

Hmm....I guess it depends on what poll to believe:
Newsmax Poll: 87% Want Bush Tax Cuts Renewed


From the above link, this also includes the wealthiest:

Americans agree by a huge margin that the tax cuts should be renewed even for the wealthiest Americans — households earning at least $250,000 a year.



edit on 9/16/2010 by WhatTheory because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
reply to post by soficrow
 

Hmm....I guess it depends on what poll to believe:




That it does! Let the polling begin...



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


Sofi, Great thread, and good discussion.


I am of the mind that we should all stop paying tax, and let the beast starve.
Now, with that said, some of us wish to follow the rules, and the I.R.S. enforcement of taxes.

So, then I think we all need tax cuts, I am with Maxmars...let them repeal taxes to the 1929 level. Why? Because, the economic indicators all point that we are there. Which means that the beast is overgrown, and needs a diet. Maybe not a starvation diet, but darn close.

bts~



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Erasurehead
 


Well then, we should pray that they restore the Federal income tax rate to pre-1913 levels.....

Federal taxes are for the Federal Reserve Bank as it's portion of profit for the Transnational Banking Cartel that no public official or banker dares recognize publicly.

The idea that this 'tax-cut' brought anything other than political gain (and prosperity for political sponsors) is illusory.

Taxes were "sold" to the people (quite literally, in fact) under the guise of equitable sacrifice by all citizens for their country. Somehow, I think you'll find it difficult to support the notion of "equitable" to the people who struggle to survive in a world where debt is currency for the masses, and property and wealth is primarily for the elite.




Anyone know what the pre-1913 tax rates were?

...Before they were modified to benefit the Federal Reserve bank and the Transnational Banking Cartel that everyone official likes to pretend doesn't exist?




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
The Democrat/Republican opposition is a huge farce.

Please, people, don't fall in to this trap AGAIN.

With regard to taxes, as with everything else, the only people who will decide what happens are those behind the scenes who control government. They repeatedly present this pantomime to the US public, the pretense that there is anything other than one party in control, and the US public buys it again and again like lemmings.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   


Time to experiment with the "trickle up" model.


This may seem a bit off the tax cut side of the issue, but I hope people see the relevancy.

I remember when we heard that the bank bailout would be $700 billion, and hearing people on the radio saying things like, "Why do they have to give it to the banks? How about dividing that up for regular people instead!? Let the banks fail!!"

Well, with 310 million Americans, that would have been over a couple thousand each. A family of five, getting over $10K, seems like that might have helped. Or maybe not.

Then the bailout figures dropped, last year they said maybe $500 billion would be enough. This year, it's dropped to under $100 billion.

I probably wouldn't mind someone handing me some thousands of dollars of course, but by the time it turns into a measly few hundred bucks, it would probably be money thrown away. And that's what's implied beyond ending tax cuts for the wealthy. We want to think it might add up to something for the rest of us.

I wonder what the average person would consider a truly helpful amount of assistance, that might really help get them feeling like they can make it again, in this terrible economy? If we gave everyone $X.00, would that be better than giving the unemployed person a job? If we gave everyone so many dollars, would that be better than lowering their mortgages?

Obviously, that last suggestion seems to have been the official "compromise", looking at TARP. Yes, of course the banks always get the money, but with TARP they were supposed to have the incentive to give their mortgage slaves a break. Did they?

NO. The banks took the money, and ran, and are getting away with it IMO. I personally know people who qualified under TARP, should get a loan modification, were then "approved", subject to making three trial payments, and a year-and-a-half later, not even one has been officially modified! Some had to finally stop making the rather large "trial" payments, that go on indefinitely.

One family I know has made 15 "trial" payments, and it's killing them, since the payments are probably $800 per month MORE than TARP is supposed to lower them to. But if they stop the "trial", they get foreclosed on. And if anyone loses a job? Well then, they will look back at 15 wasted months. The bank got the "extra" bucks, and on top of it, they still take the house!

Hmmm. As I recall, during the last Depression, the banks took so many farms, so many millions of acres, that it literally changed America. I guess if enough homeowners lose their homes, we'll have some serious "change" then.

No wonder the bailout amount is dropping! They're squeezing more blood from their turnips than they originally thought they could get away with.

And so, yet another government sponsored FRAUD, masquerading as assistance for the regular person. But it's just the same old welfare for banks. They're grabbing money with both fists!

OK, so now back to eliminating tax breaks. In comparison to what the Federal Reserve, and the whole rotten banking system is doing to the US, and the world, a bit of extra tax here or there isn't much. In fact, it does appear to be more or less the usual political nonsense. Sure, take some tax break away from the wealthy, make the little guy feel good again. Meanwhile, the wealthiest people in the world operate behind, and through things like Trusts, and their corporations, meaning that the advertised change won't add three cents to the equation. They'll just shift things around again, and nothing will change.

And the little person? Nothing will change there either, they won't see any improvement, the unemployment will still be going up, jobs will still be headed overseas, where slave wages are still perfectly OK.

Oh yeah. And Americans will still shop at Wal-Mart, and continue gaining weight, as they continue to gobble up McDonalds trash, even if their flat broke. Somehow, these basics will just go on.

Ending tax breaks? First, let's end the Federal Reserve debt-based money tyranny. THEN we'll see the massive amount left over, and we will literally be issuing "dividends" to the citizens! No one, neither rich nor poor, will feel like they have been cheated.

Best of all, people will learn that "abundance" was the reality all along, and the only hindrance to a better future for us all, would be if we ever let the banksters back into the hen-house again.

JR



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by JR MacBeth


Time to experiment with the "trickle up" model.


... Yes, of course the banks always get the money, but with TARP they were supposed to have the incentive to give their mortgage slaves a break. Did they?

NO. The banks took the money, and ran, and are getting away with it IMO. ...

And so, yet another government sponsored FRAUD, masquerading as assistance for the regular person. But it's just the same old welfare for banks. They're grabbing money with both fists!

OK, so now back to eliminating tax breaks. In comparison to what the Federal Reserve, and the whole rotten banking system is doing to the US, and the world, a bit of extra tax here or there isn't much. ...

Ending tax breaks? First, let's end the Federal Reserve debt-based money tyranny. THEN we'll see the massive amount left over, and we will literally be issuing "dividends" to the citizens! No one, neither rich nor poor, will feel like they have been cheated.

Best of all, people will learn that "abundance" was the reality all along, and the only hindrance to a better future for us all, would be if we ever let the banksters back into the hen-house again.



I agree. It didn't work to give billions to the banks, and it wouldn't work to give a few hundred dollars each to all the little people. Why not? 'Cuz nothing did or would or could change - it's the system that's kafuffled.

Time to change the system.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join