Obama's plan DOES leave in the middle class tax cuts.......for now. I would agree with him....that not raising taxes on the middle class is good for now. I say "for now" because the middle class couldn't handle a tax increase right now. I have been very consistent in saying that taxes should be raised on those who make more than 375,000 per year right away. This would only include those in the highest marginal tax rates. Further tax increases should be attached to bench marks in the economy like the unemployment rate, gdp growth, etc. so you are not over burdening the middle class. That said, maybe the economy will grow at such an enormous rate that the tax increase on the middle class will be unnecessary. Now that I've explained that to you two, it doesn't change the fact that you are griping about the middle and lower classes not paying taxes but do not want those tax cuts repealed either. so which is it?
I think 375k is a more reasonable number. 250k is still very much working/middle class in a lot of areas of the country. If you're self employed and make 250, you're paying 60k-65k in taxes if it's all earned income. That leaves you with 180k or 15k/month. Live in the northeast on 15k/month. You're very comfortable, but far from rich.
Red I have little time to do the research as it should be but I do intend. In the meantime here is a piece by Fact Checker.org http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-outsourcer-overreach/ It primarily addresses Obama campaign claims and debunks them pretty well. FactCheck.org isn't a partisan operation but is part of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and Univ of Pennsylvania and if you visit their website you see they skewer both sides. They also cite documentation and sources so should be reliable. From this one and admittedly not complete but if you read it through you see most of BHO's campaign claims are false and misleading and that Romney did not ship jobs overseas as claimed. Not expecting an apology or retraction at this point but ask that you open your mind to the possibility. More to follow.
250,000 is too low IMO. Like most things in our modern politics, the answer to the majority of our major issues can be solved by looking at the middle ground between what one party is advocating versus what the opposing party is advocating.
You are deflecting again. I have argument with this fair share bullshit. Its bullshit. Has ZERO to do with fairness when close to 50% can pay ZERO. I also have issue with the raising of any taxes as a fix with no balance budget amendment. Its all talk and a ploy for stupid people to blindly blame the "rich". Class warfare at its best.
Red so far every place I have gone to for detailed jobs results while Mitt was at Bain have said the figures are almost impossible to determine. I will keep trying. I have a feeling that his performance is positive and fairly strong. Here is an editorial in the WSJ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204879004577108500491449164.html. I know I know consider the source but I don't post it for facts though there are some points that may inform. Rather it has a better explanation of what Bain did and how they did it. They took risks not to loot a company but to grow a small one or find a way to save failing ones. This and the fact checker article also explain the difference between outsourceing and moving jobs. One example of call centers. Bain not only EXPANDED call centers in the US but also create new ones overseas to meet language or other local requirements. How many americans can speak french or Hindi or german? To make a blanket claim that establishing jobs overseas is wrong is not only incorrect but short sighted.
It is a world market, yet American factory's should say fuck it and not expand b/c expanding is evil and un American...
well then make your argument amigo. so far all you have said is that it's bull shit. we get it that you think it is bull shit.....tell us why......tell how you would do it differently and why your way is superior. no one is blaming the rich. I am blaming the dumb asses who passed out tax cuts right after we declared war. it was a shitty decision then and it needs to be changed. it has nothing to do with disliking the rich. in fact, that's almost a laughable. If we went by what I think would be a good solution my taxes would go up immediately......real class warfare, huh?
You know, you do not have to wait to be taxed if you feel you are under paying. Pony up. Obama's Fair Share Argument is class warfare. I have outlined why I THINK that. This isn't difficult to follow. On the point of a good system. Flat tax. What number? We can get to that after we balance our god damn budget.
I don't think you have a very clear understanding of how government budgeting works, Pride. You cannot balance your god damn budget without an increase in revenues. This isn't partisan conjecture, this is a hard truth.....it's math. In order to balance the budget you must have at least an equal amount of revenues and expenses. It has been asserted by many economists of both political stripes that a balanced budget CANNOT BE ATTAINED without an increase in revenues. So in order to balance the budget the congress and president will have to cut spending and raise taxes in order to bring the balance into budget. You want to talk about class warfare? Let's do it. Over the past ten years the rich have gotten richer at a faster pace than ever before. During that same period of time the poor became incredibly more poor. This happened because the Bush Tax Cuts were unfairly slanted toward the richest Americans. The Republicans are far more to blame for class warfare than are democrats; they are the ones who have been sucking rich dick the past 10 years, not the Democrats. A flat tax is one of the worst ideas in the era of modern thinking and you should be ashamed that you even brought it up. I would go into all the reasons but it will have to wait for another day.
