It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Yeah, I don't see how anyone who isn't overly wealthy can defend the Republicans on this one.
This is about a TAX CUT...not every single pet project you can try to cram into the bill to make it unpassable and then say "Hey, we tried.".
Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Indigo5
It is not an equal playing field if you take a higher % from one group than another. Why should someone who is successful pay 35% and someone else pay 17% or nothing?
while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks.
Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate.
Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.
To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE...IT IS BRIEF...WARREN IS A SELF MADE BILLIONAIRE AND KNOWS WHERE HE CAME FROM AND WHERE WE ARE
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
The ultimate argument here is that the GOP is insisting (per Obama's Pay-Go nonsense from last year) that some way of funding all of this is agreed upon. As is usually the case, Democrat lawmakers find it nigh unto impossible to actually balance a budget and fund anything, preferring to have their cake, eat their cake, and then throw the credit card statement from the baker shop in the trash when they recieve it.
The Senate's two-month measure would reduce the deficit by nearly $3 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Under the plan, the $33 billion in costs would be offset by an increase in the fees that new homeowners with federally backed mortgages would pay to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration. Those entities would then turn that money over to the U.S. Treasury.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
why would someone who doesn't earn $250,000 a year vote republican ?
not rhetorical, I'm curious
Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by AwakeinNM
Ron Paul is not here to save you as he has and continues to remain silent on this and will not take a stand means he's for the tax increase the nation is about to be dealt!