Scott Brown: I'm Going to Vote Against Raising Taxes by Voting to Raise Taxes

"It's December 31," [Boston radio host Jim Braude] posed the scenario. "The only thing that is before you on the Bush tax cuts is an extension for people under $250,000, so you would be raising taxes [if the bill failed]."

"You'll vote no against it," Braude pressed as Brown hedged a bit before finally answering.

"Crystal clear. No," Brown said, contending that he was "not going to be the candidate that's gonna be -- the first thing is raise your taxes."

readingisforsnobs.blogspot.com...

Can these dudes make it any more abundantly clear that they don't give two sticks about "low taxes" for anyone that's not in the top income bracket? Giving tax cuts was always just a way to provide some sugary treats for the rabble, so that it would make swallowing even bigger tax cuts for the rich more palatable.

Given the chance, if the wealthy's tax cuts were EVER in danger, Republicans would sell out the 99% of tax payers before you can say "trickle down economics".

Originally posted by megax5000

"It's December 31," [Boston radio host Jim Braude] posed the scenario. "The only thing that is before you on the Bush tax cuts is an extension for people under $250,000, so you would be raising taxes [if the bill failed]."

"You'll vote no against it," Braude pressed as Brown hedged a bit before finally answering.

"Crystal clear. No," Brown said, contending that he was "not going to be the candidate that's gonna be -- the first thing is raise your taxes."

readingisforsnobs.blogspot.com...

Can these dudes make it any more abundantly clear that they don't give two sticks about "low taxes" for anyone that's not in the top income bracket? Giving tax cuts was always just a way to provide some sugary treats for the rabble, so that it would make swallowing even bigger tax cuts for the rich more palatable.

Given the chance, if the wealthy's tax cuts were EVER in danger, Republicans would sell out the 99% of tax payers before you can say "trickle down economics".

You're right, they should just bend over and give in to the Democrats and do whatever they want. They should extend ONLY the part they like. Extend it all or let it all die and come up with something new. Just a question, what portion of income tax do the top 10% earners pay?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Just a question, what portion of income tax do the top 10% earners pay?

How much more do they use up of our resources? How much more do they benefit from what government has to offer than the other 90%? Answer that and I got your answer.

Scot Brown seems completely bought and sold. Always looking for someone else to answer his questions for him.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by megax5000

"It's December 31," [Boston radio host Jim Braude] posed the scenario. "The only thing that is before you on the Bush tax cuts is an extension for people under $250,000, so you would be raising taxes [if the bill failed]."

"You'll vote no against it," Braude pressed as Brown hedged a bit before finally answering.

"Crystal clear. No," Brown said, contending that he was "not going to be the candidate that's gonna be -- the first thing is raise your taxes."

readingisforsnobs.blogspot.com...

Can these dudes make it any more abundantly clear that they don't give two sticks about "low taxes" for anyone that's not in the top income bracket? Giving tax cuts was always just a way to provide some sugary treats for the rabble, so that it would make swallowing even bigger tax cuts for the rich more palatable.

Given the chance, if the wealthy's tax cuts were EVER in danger, Republicans would sell out the 99% of tax payers before you can say "trickle down economics".

You're right, they should just bend over and give in to the Democrats and do whatever they want. They should extend ONLY the part they like. Extend it all or let it all die and come up with something new. Just a question, what portion of income tax do the top 10% earners pay?

\

What percent of the economy do the top ten percent control?

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Just a question, what portion of income tax do the top 10% earners pay?

How much more do they use up of our resources? How much more do they benefit from what government has to offer than the other 90%? Answer that and I got your answer.

Scot Brown seems completely bought and sold. Always looking for someone else to answer his questions for him.

How about you answer and source it. How much welfare does the top 10% use?

Top 10% earn 45% of all income, and pay 70% of all income taxes.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
How about you answer and source it. How much welfare does the top 10% use?

Top 10% earn 45% of all income, and pay 70% of all income taxes.

What are you calling welfare? The millions is tax subsidies oil companies get? The millions in tax dollars in refunds companies like GE get? The huge tax breaks on capital gains? What are we calling welfare? I am kind of curious how you define "earn" as well but that can wait.

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
How about you answer and source it. How much welfare does the top 10% use?

Top 10% earn 45% of all income, and pay 70% of all income taxes.

What are you calling welfare? The millions is tax subsidies oil companies get? The millions in tax dollars in refunds companies like GE get? The huge tax breaks on capital gains? What are we calling welfare? I am kind of curious how you define "earn" as well but that can wait.

Why are we talking about oil comanies. This is not a business tax discussion, it's personal income. Let's leave it at that as the issues are completely separate.

So let's go back to the topic at hand, income tax.

The top 10% earn 45% of all income and pay 70% of all income taxes. You think they need additional income tax burdens? Oh and please you still need to cite how much welfare the top 10% income earners receive, thanks.