Lessons unlearned
Well, it looks like the Democrats have learned nothing from the last election. Bloomberg reports that they are still arguing over what the tax structure should look like last year as the Obama Tax Hikes (can we stop calling them the Bush Tax Cuts now, since they’ve been in place for a decade) loom just a few weeks away;
“There are a kajillion ideas floating around,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat.
One, by Senator Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, would steer tax cuts that would have flowed to high-income individuals to businesses in the hopes of stimulating investment and hiring. Another, by Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, would sustain the Bush tax cuts for all households earning less than $1 million, rather than $250,000.
Representative Dave Camp, a Michigan Republican, told a meeting of business tax lobbyists that members of his party would oppose a third alternative that would extend tax breaks for middle-income households for a longer period than for richer Americans.
Democratic senators including Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan yesterday said they oppose financing tax cuts for high-income taxpayers with deficits. Vermont Senator Bernard Sanders, an independent who votes with Democrats, also criticized the idea.
Has anyone pointed out to these knuckleheads that when President Bush cut Clinton tax hikes, revenues increased? I guess that would be pointless when you’re talking to goofballs like Bernie Sanders.
Not only did they not learn their lessons on tax hikes, the Democrats are still resisting earmark reform according to the Associated Press;
“I have an obligation to the people of Nevada to do what is important to Nevada, not what is important to some bureaucrat down here (in Washington) with green eyeshades,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. “So I am not going, personally, going to back off of bringing stuff back to Nevada.”
So says the guy who barely kept his seat in the Senate.
Category: Congress sucks
I’m no economist, but the math seems simple enough to me. If those tax increases go into effect anywhere in our society, it will trigger a domino effect, and we will all suffer from price increases, as businesses pass on the added burden to their customers…us!
Whatever we do, we shouldn’t eliminate the tax cuts to multi-millionaires and billionaires, y’know, the top 1%. Some of those poor people have had to sell their 6th vacation homes to make ends meet! Y’know who I mean, the top 1% who own 35% of the wealth. Why should the tax burden of average folks be carried on the backs of the poor misunderstood billionaires, who after all have become accoustomed to the sweetheart deal the US tax code gives them? Billionaires are people too!
Billionaires ARE people, and they have lives and cost of living to deal with, also. It’s not fair to hate someone just because they’ve been successful and they are rich. If a millionaire or billionaire engages in nefarious business practices, he should face criminal charges. But I do not agree with penalizing a person because they are successful. What I want to see is everyone paying their fair share of taxes — not more or less because they make more or less money, or have a net worth of more or less.
Joe, what part of passed on over head don’t you understand?
Fact, increase in costs to those you are so jealous of will equal an increase in cost to all of us, and a corrisponding decrease in revenue to the government. It’s basic man, quit hating.
Billionaires are people, but the game is way rigged in their favor. I too want an equitable tax code. For crying out loud, some of the richest people in the US (Gates, Buffet) want the tax rates raised on people of their income level. Between a regressive tax code and the Citiznes United decision, among other things, the middle class is in a death spiral.
Most business owners I have known (only a few, and none of them millionaires) pay themselves a salary as well as their employees. And their salaries were reasonable, as far as I could tell. Just because the business might be worth a million dollars, doesn’t mean that that is the owner’s salary. If a business owner is very successful, yes, he might be a millionaire or even a billionaire in his own right, but I can guarantee you, if his business is viable and legitimate, then that owner is putting tens of millions back into the business that made them that wealthy to begin with.
I do know that the tax codes give breaks to large corporations as a form of stimulus; the idea being, of course, that less tax burden will free up more money for the business to invest, in either employees or the business itself. In and of itself, I don’t have a problem with that. Where I would complain would be when these breaks are used to buy perks instead of being used for the business.
Has anyone pointed out to these knuckleheads that when President Bush cut Clinton tax hikes, revenues increased? I guess that would be pointless when you’re talking to goofballs like Bernie Sanders.
==========
Recall when the MF-ing media asked Senator Obama about this on the campaign trail, he responded by saying he did not care about increasing revenue, he was interested in “fairness”.
—–
GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, “I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton,” which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.
But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.
OBAMA: Right.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year — $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.
—–
Joey, Joey, just WTF does Citizens United have to do with tax rates? Or, is that just more sour grapes on the part of you and the other lefties you share your bong with?
And, what Nag said, everyone should pay their fair share, whether it’s a million bucks, or whether it’s five bucks. Everyone needs to have some skin in the game, otherwise, they just sit back and wait for Obama to give out some Obamacash.
Now, I expect kudos from Joey, for anyone who has ever suggested that “everyone” pay their fair share, after all, he got almost positively orgasmic over the statements of Gates and Buffet
Joe…
So you let me guess? You just like to play dumb, right? For every time one of you dunces says something like the tax cuts were rigged, I tell the truth. You know, using facts, not emotions.
1. The tax cuts were across the board. If you paid taxes, you got a tax cut. The even more weird part is that even if you didn’t pay taxes, some people got a welfare check, er I mean a “rebate”! Happened under Clinton, too.
I’d say that was fair, even if I know that is not how it works, because, in effect, those were my tax dollars being given to someone who didn’t actually deserve it.
2. Your jealousy of those who are the producers of the economy is laughable. They worked their asses off to get rich and that’s how it goes. Who do you think actually creates the jobs, I mean, besides the government- who produces *nothing?* Who do you think reinvests the money saved from the tax cuts?
It’s people like you who should take an econ 101 class, and then maybe watch how hard the rich people work to get where they are. You know, as opposed to holding out their hands for OPM. (Other People’s money)
Wealth envy is never good, Joe. It clouds your eyes to the opportunities that could make a whiner like you more wealthy than you are. You probably won’t ever *get it*.