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 unveils $3 trillion deficit-cutting plan and raise Taxes

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


no they arent

cutting spending is the only way to cut the deficit

anyone who is serious about cutting the deficit knows this the only function raising taxes has is what?

to continue the same bad habits that have led us off a cliff.




posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I notice that, as usual, the psychopathic megalomaniac does not include cutting defense spending (read: stopping the murders of the citizens of sovereign nations) in his plan to destroy America.

But at least he's cutting $300 billion from Medicare/Medicaid! He could cut that much just by ending his wars against brown people. Instead he wants to open a new war front against elderly and disabled people.

/TOA



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


that really is some nobel peace prizer winner

isnt he



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Only a community organizer could think that raising taxes during a recession could be a good idea.

Who voted for this idiot?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


not i

i was anti obama before anti obama was cool



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


no they arent

cutting spending is the only way to cut the deficit

anyone who is serious about cutting the deficit knows this the only function raising taxes has is what?

to continue the same bad habits that have led us off a cliff.



No amount of spending cuts will bring down the deficit in a meaningful way. Not unless you want to cut the government's staff to 100 people and no military at all. Hell, the largest single-policy contributor to the debt are Bush's (or may I say Obama's) tax breaks for the rich. Cutting military spending (aka ending those silly wars) is another obvious choice, Ron Paul got that one right. Either way, tax increases...and/or fixing of tax loopholes will have to happen.

The only possible way for tax increases not being necessary would be an incredible boom in the economy, like during Clinton's years. Wanna bet our chances of that happening anytime soon?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
dont see the system benefiting the rich at all


That's because you don't want to.

Even if they worked hard for what they have they have still benefited from the system.

The guy getting a handout also benefits from the system.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
no amount of taxation is going to do anything

did you even bother to look at any link in this thread? how many millions of americans are getting a government check? the numbers are there

heres another link not to look at or bother reading

www.npr.org...


Broad tax breaks granted to millions of families at all income levels dwarf the corporate giveaways. Over the past two years, largely because of these popular benefits in the federal income tax code, the government has reached a rare milestone in tax collection — it has given away as much as it takes in.



The number of tax breaks has nearly doubled since the last major tax overhaul 25 years ago, with lawmakers adding new benefits for children, college tuition, retirement savings and investment. At the same time, some long-standing breaks have exploded in value, such as the deduction for mortgage interest and the tax-free treatment of health-insurance premiums paid by employers.



All told, federal taxpayers last year received $1.08 trillion in credits, deductions and other perks while paying $1.09 trillion in income taxes, according to government estimates.



The Joint Tax committee estimated the President's budget proposal to make permanent all the current rates except the top rates would cost $2.3 trillion. Add 'patching' the AMT (at $683 billion) and you are at a cost of $3 trillion. So if the President wants to extend the other tax provisions- the ten percent tax rate, the child tax credit, protecting couples from the marriage penalty – it will 'cost' much more money than he will 'save' by raising the top income tax rate. Get it? He can't have it both ways – if ending the 'tax cuts for the wealthy' saves money, then extending the other provisions costs money (and a lot more).


nice try to blame bush



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by TreadUpon
 


This is true and just further proves that the system serves the rich.

No matter what happens the cost is transferred to the consumer.
If Exactly: The only freedom you have form this cycle is to vote with your dollar. Research what places ensure that you're getting gouged the least for what you are buying to support stupidity. I'm not talking about overall price, but see which companies are willingly eating their own overhead to give you a better deal.
but yeah, not buying things that are unreasonably taxed by the government is hard to do.

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Anyone with a functioning brain and the ability look at the figures will realize that tax increases are NECESSARY to cut the deficit. No amount of spending cuts would solve the budget deficit issue on its own.
At this point, yes I see no way out of it. Oh, wait, let the Government sell it's own assets that it's holding to pay off it's own debts...Orly Moment The Governemtn does exactly what you are complaining that the rich do. They get in debt, pass it off to their people and don't use their own assets to pay it.

The only possible way for tax increases not being necessary would be an incredible boom in the economy, like during Clinton's years. Wanna bet our chances of that happening anytime soon?
I just gave 1 other option. there's always other options out there...we just don't like to look at them.

For instance, the government could start an oil drilling company and pay the Chinese in Oil. Heck, they have a lot of reserves on their own. You don't always pay cash with cash.

Damn, 2 while not being all here.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   



what was that mr president?


i missed it cant you repeat that?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 



If a household overspends, putting a halt on the spending most definitely would make a huge difference in the deficit.

Prioritizing and spending money on the necessities first would/should be the next plan of action.

And yes, "Lopez" does benefit from the side jobs (mowing lawns), just as all households that overspend would benefit. So getting a side job would also make a difference in paying bills.

Shelter, food and medicine/physician care should be at the top of the list of course but it might also need to be trimmed.

In the case of our government, they spent our money and maxed out the credit cards all the while lying to us where and how OUR money was to be spent.

We the people should not bail them out especially since they won't stop spending. We should do a citizens arrest on everyone of them


After all they work for us.

Obama is the great divider and deflector.

The rich won't suffer nearly as much as we are suffering (and will suffer) once all these taxes are in place. Being angry at the rich or forcing them be "fair" is exactly what this administration wants you to focus on.

The radical socialists have a bulls eye on YOU and ME and the Mom and Pop business's out there.

The "rich" already pay about 35% of the income taxes in America and there is only about 15% of them.

Life isn't fair and it never will be.

The government seems to think it has a right to take things away from the "rich". Who's next? The people who own more then two acres of land?

They are spending our money like an addict on crack, all the while lying and stealing more and more from you.

The rich will do what is necessary to survive.

Meanwhile the puppets need to bend over, here it comes again

If that doesn't crash the dollar and cause you to depend on them .... plan on bending over AGAIN.

The bottom line is Obama wants you focused on the rich like a good slave.


Imo.







edit on 19-9-2011 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
no amount of taxation is going to do anything

did you even bother to look at any link in this thread? how many millions of americans are getting a government check? the numbers are there

heres another link not to look at or bother reading

www.npr.org...


If that was aimed at me you're right. I don't care who they tax or how. If they tax corps, then the corps raise prices and if that doesn't give them the bottom line they want then they move abroad.

If they tax individuals then it's a gun to your head and nobody (other than the freeman guys) is gonna do anything about it. What are you doing other than whining?




edit on 19-9-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You can take 100% of everything the bottom 50% own and earn and it wouldn't add up to the amount the top 10% pay out in tax.

The bottom 50% of Americans control 2.5% of its wealth.

Should we round up to 3% and take it anyway to prove your point?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
no amount of taxation of less than 10 milliion people

will ever make that other 300 million rich

talk about lopsided

i would appreciate if people would actually read the linked source material

but seriously i guess why bother

proof positive of the "i want it all i want it now and i sure the hell dont care how"



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Jon Stewart had it right:

Daily Show



Well, as usual discussions of this type typically exclude the one thing that shoots this whole "defense of the rich" garbage.

THE LOWER 50% of the population in the US owns about 2.5% of the total wealth in this country.

TWO POINT FIVE PERCENT OF THE WEALTH

Business Insider

That comes to a total of around 1.45 trillion dollars the represents EVERYTHING THE LOWER 50% OF THE POPULATION OF THE USA OWNS.

Using that number we can figure out that the total wealth here is 58 trillion subtract the 1.45 trillion that represents EVERYTHING THE LOWER 50% owns, it comes to 56.55 trillion dollars of wealth that the upper 50% owns.

Current debt is around 14.5 trillion dollars.

IF YOU TOOK EVERYTHING THE LOWER 50% OWNS, YOU WOULD STILL ONLY BE ABLE TO PAY 10% OF THE DEBT.

Yet, if you took 25% of everything the upper 50% owns, YOU WOULD PAY OFF THE DEBT COMPLETELY.


YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT INEQUALITY?? HOW ABOUT DISCUSSING WEALTH INEQUALITY, instead of spewing taglines that are not even true. I guess if you repeat a lie enough it becomes true huh? Right out of both parties play books.


A favorite talking point used by conservatives to justify giving more tax breaks to the wealthy is that 50% of Americans pay no taxes. The truth is that 86% of Americans pay taxes.

The truth is that the talking point that half of all Americans pay no taxes is a misrepresentation. Here is the full quote from the Tax Policy Center,

The fraction of tax units paying no income tax varies widely by filing status and type of unit.About 47 percent of single filers will owe no tax, compared with 38 percent of joint filers and 72 percent of heads of household. More than half of elderly tax units and tax units with children will pay no income tax this year.

The 47% statistic is not all Americans pay no taxes, but single filers who will pay no federal income taxes. According to the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities the real reason why 47%-51% of Americans paid no federal income taxes in 2009 is,

The 51 percent figure is an anomaly that reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act — including the "Making Work Pay" tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired.

The combination of the recession and the Obama stimulus cut taxes to low and middle income Americans led to fewer Americans owing federal income tax in 2009.

The Tax Policy Center has tried to correct Fox News and the right wing media's misuse of their research. In April 2010, Howard Glickman of the TPC wrote,

Let me explain—repeat actually—what this means: About half of taxpayers paid no federal income tax last year. It does not mean they paid no tax at all. Many shelled out Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. In fact, only 14 percent of Americans didn't pay either income or payroll taxes. Some paid property taxes and, it is fair to say, just about all of them paid sales taxes of one kind or another. So to say they pay no taxes is flat wrong. However, this class warfare-like rhetoric plays to a perception that the income tax is a chump tax: Only hard-working folks like us pay it. The welfare queens don't. The super-rich don't. It is a powerful emotional argument. It is also flat wrong.

The actual number of Americans who don't pay any taxes isn't half, but 14%. This group of non-taxpayers of any kind is largely composed of the elderly and disabled. The people who don't pay taxes do so because they can't work.


Article link

But by all means, keep spewing out taglines and half truths, if you are not one of the elite yet, maybe they will let you in if you keep licking their boots. I tend to think it is more likely they will kick you in the head and laugh as you spiral down into the third world hell they created, with the help of supporters like you.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   
jon stewart and sodahead

how many links have i provided in here for anyone to bother to read

about about no truth posters who dont bother to read threads



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I guess you did not bother to read the quotes in the soda head article that are from the TAX POLICY INSTITUTE THAT YOU QUOTE IN YOUR TAGLINE.

That was the reason for quoting that particular article.

Did you even bother to watch the video??? I guess not as he includes plenty of facts and figures and quotes.

I see you did not even bother with the question of wealth distribution.

Are you questioning the distribution numbers?

Perhaps a FEDERAL RESERVE paper on the subject will suffice:

Fed Reserve Report


Table 5: Percent of net worth held by various groups defined in terms of percentiles of the distribution of net worth; 1989, 1992, 1995, 1998, and 2001

Year Percentile group 0-49.9 50-89.9 90-94.9 95-98.9 99-100
1989 2.7 9.9 13.0 24.1 30.3
0.4 1.8 1.6 2.3 2.3
1992 3.3 29.7 12.6 24.4 30.2
0.2 1.1 0.7 1.3 1.4
1995 3.6 28.6 11.9 21.3 34.6
0.2 0.7 0.6 0.9 1.3
1998 3.0 28.4 11.4 23.3 33.9
0.2 0.9 0.6 1.2 1.5
2001 2.8 27.4 12.1 25.0 32.7



Unfortunately the table will not format right, even after formatting by hand.

You tell people they did not read your material, yet it appears YOU DO THE SAME THING. You would have know the soda head article contained the FULL quotes from the TAX POLICY CENTER instead of the parts you so love to spew.


And yet, here we are again, you IGNORE THE INEQUALITY OF WEALTH in the country, while using half truth tag lines to further your point.



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I guess I have to take out the quotes from the TAX POLICY CENTER and the author of the articles on the income tax are from, as you will not read them yourselves:

"The fraction of tax units paying no income tax varies widely by filing status and type of unit.About 47 percent of single filers will owe no tax, compared with 38 percent of joint filers and 72 percent of heads of household. More than half of elderly tax units and tax units with children will pay no income tax this year."

"The 51 percent figure is an anomaly that reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act — including the "Making Work Pay" tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits — were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired. "

"The Tax Policy Center has tried to correct Fox News and the right wing media's misuse of their research. In April 2010, Howard Glickman of the TPC wrote,

Let me explain—repeat actually—what this means: About half of taxpayers paid no federal income tax last year. It does not mean they paid no tax at all. Many shelled out Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. In fact, only 14 percent of Americans didn't pay either income or payroll taxes. Some paid property taxes and, it is fair to say, just about all of them paid sales taxes of one kind or another. So to say they pay no taxes is flat wrong. However, this class warfare-like rhetoric plays to a perception that the income tax is a chump tax: Only hard-working folks like us pay it. The welfare queens don't. The super-rich don't. It is a powerful emotional argument. It is also flat wrong. "

THESE ARE THE QUOTES from the article that your sources are writing their stories from.

I guess we will need more articles from the TAX POLICY CENTER AFTER the 2009 report that you and the articles like to post PARTS of:

Tax policy center

Tax Policy Center

Tax policy center

to be fair the ORIGINAL article, that all your links are based on:

Tax Policy Center


And there is more, you should really check the site out.

Anyway, this is not even my main point.

The main Point I am making is how one can harp on the lower 50% of the US, yet they own so LITTLE of the wealth. What do you want from them? Everything they own? Even that would cover about 10% of debt.

Why do you refuse to discuss the point of wealth disparity, but in the same breath complain about Federal income taxes on the lower 50% of the US population?



edit on 20-9-2011 by Dreamwatcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   
fine lets talk about it

lets talk about the difference between millionaires and billionaires as opposed to those people who just sit back and wait for someone to make them rich

buffet,gates and any number of people didnt become that way they went out and did something

i forgot all rich people just start out that way thats how a gap gets formed and maintained

hell how many people does that millionaire employ? hell how did he even get rich to begin with?

oh someone must have just handed it to him.

want to talk about the federal reserve and the wealth gap?

lets talk about the devaluation of the dollar lets talk about that 1 1913 being worth over 22 today

lets talk about 1000 back then would be worth over 22,000 today

yep people dont have a clue tax tax tax alway someone elses fault for everything


edit on 20-9-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join