Obama to call for one-year extension of some Bush-era tax rates

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Wow! Are you kidding me? It's all about percentages, not dollars!

In 1913, the U.S. population was estimated to be a little over 76 million and today we're banging up against 312 million. Surely you're not trying to profess that our government can meet the needs of a nation of 312 million people for the same number of "dollars" as was required to meet the needs of 76 million, are you? Not to mention the fact that these numbers have not been adjusted for inflation and/or valuation of the U.S. dollar.

Anyone who would attempt to side-track this conversation into one of dollars spent then versus dollars spent now, contributes nothing pertinent to the debate. What it does is, it demonstrates their complete lack of "Critical Thinking Skills," something that our current GOP controlled state legislature here in Texas is currently attempting to eliminate the teaching of, in our public schools. Go figure!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


You misunderstand the question


Good diversion just the same.



I will assume this has struck a nerve or two with you.

It must be simple raving jealousy.

The "extra" revenues from higher tax rates from "the rich" (or anybody) could easily lead to wilder spending.

"The rich" are actually paying a higher Amount (per person) already.

Perhaps an even higher Amount (if handled the right way) would help the $16 trillion deficit, but by how much ?

The "percentages" are only a 'comparison' in reality.

Again, the last 10 or 15 years are all that would be relevant to the question that you misunderstood.
 










edit on Jul-11-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
LISTEN UP PEOPLE!

If I am a small business owner making over 250,000 a year, I won't pay higher taxes.

You will.

If my taxes go up, I will just increase the price of the goods/services proportionally.

So the poor get screwed.
The middle class gets screwed.

The business owner?

Not so much.

YAY Obama.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
LISTEN UP PEOPLE!

If I am a small business owner making over 250,000 a year, I won't pay higher taxes.

You will.

If my taxes go up, I will just increase the price of the goods/services proportionally.

So the poor get screwed.
The middle class gets screwed.

The business owner?

Not so much.

YAY Obama.


Truth be told this is just another political game played by Obama during an election

year. It won't work but they had to come up with something.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by Flatfish
 


The GOP in Texas has saved Texas.

North Dakota & Texas are doing the best right now.



Yeah, and as was clearly evident by his performance in the GOP debates, Rick Perry is smarter than Jethro Bodine too!


The only reason that Texas "appears" to be doing better right now is because we are the "China" of the U.S.A. We are currently in 1st place in the new GOP all-american "race to the bottom."

The same way that municipalities now compete with each other to attract new business by awarding extended tax abatements, free real estate, etc., Texas has done on a state wide scale.

When the abatements expire, those businesses just re-locate to the state with the current best offer, leaving the original state without ever living out the intent of the original agreement, which was that the municipality would re-coop the early loses over the long haul once the tax rates kicked back in.

Guess who gets left "holding the bag?" The taxpayers, that's who!

The same thing is happening to our nation on a much larger scale via the long term reduction of the top marginal tax rates as reflected in the charts I provided.

It just takes a while before the process catches up to ya, that's all.

Go ahead and fool yourself into believing that Texas is doing so much better than everyone else if you want to but I can assure you, in the long run you'll be wrong. I live here, I've done so since my birth 56 yrs. ago and I know better.
edit on 11-7-2012 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 
Obama is a fail so epic, he makes Rosie O'Donell look like a slimfast success story.




posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 
Obama is a fail so epic, he makes Rosie O'Donell look like a slimfast success story.





The Job Growth Reports are so terrible that Romney will simply stroll into the

White House. The 3 debates are in October. Obama is doomed.

The next Job Growth Report will arrive the first week of August. I predict

only 50,000 jobs will be created. -- stagnation --



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Flatfish ALL the states that have the GOP in charge are doing really well.

States like California & Illinois look like a train wreck.


----------
Texas is leading the way with tort reform!

Punitive damages have been capped at $250,000.


Obama didn't add tort reform to ObamaCare because he is in bed with the trial lawyers.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen

You misunderstand the question


Good diversion just the same.



I will assume this has struck a nerve or two with you.

It must be simple raving jealousy.


Absolute willful ignorance always strikes a nerve with me. Jealousy? Hardly.



Originally posted by xuenchen
The "extra" revenues from higher tax rates from "the rich" (or anybody) could easily lead to wilder spending.


Yeah, so could lying this nation into an extended war in a foreign nation.


Originally posted by xuenchen
"The rich" are actually paying a higher Amount (per person) already.

Perhaps an even higher Amount (if handled the right way) would help the $16 trillion deficit, but by how much ?

The "percentages" are only a 'comparison' in reality.

Again, the last 10 or 15 years are all that would be relevant to the question that you misunderstood.
 


You can replace the word "dollars" with the word "amount" but it doesn't change the equation, only the way you're phrasing it. The percentages are "REALITY!"

Furthermore, it's not about how much is paid on a "per person" basis either.

This is exactly how, "it catches up to ya," like I said before.

That may have worked at first but over time, as the wealth amasses amongst a very small minority via the tax reductions in the top marginal rates, it reaches a point where the rest of society cannot keep up with the needs demanded by population growth. That's why percentages are everything. Wherever the wealth of the nation is, a certain percentage of that wealth is required in order to sustain it's government obligations.

I hope I put that in simple enough terms for your to grasp.





top topics
 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join