Would you be willing to pay more in taxes?

[USA4ME]

MadHound (31,096 posts)

Would you be willing to pay more in taxes?

Well, it is rushing towards us, the end of the Bush tax cuts, which Obama extended once already. Clinton, Summers, and others on the right are rushing to say that the tax cuts should remain in place, even if "temporarily". Obama himself is saying that we shouldn't renew the tax cuts, at least for the rich.

But what it is already shaping up to be is another in a long line of showdowns, with the House 'Pugs wanting play another game of chicken. Because surely, somebody is going to introduce a bill to extend the tax cuts for the non-rich, but the 'Pugs will reply that it is all or none, either everybody, including the rich, get a tax cut, or nobody does.

My question is would you be willing for everybody's tax cuts to end? The average household would have to pay an additional $2,100 in taxes a year(that's based on an average household income of $49,900). The rich, of course, would pay much more in taxes, ten times the average and up. So would you be willing to make that deal?

I would, because frankly we need the revenue, and the Clinton tax hike wasn't that much of a hardship. Not to mention that I would be willing to play that game of chicken with the 'Pugs, just to show them that Dems are ready to fight and willing to take it all the way. What about you?  

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002777713

Hey they go ..... again.

.

[thundley4]

I don't want anyone to pay more in taxes except for the liberals saying that they want higher taxes.   Otherwise, no tax increases until spending is cut in reasonable and meaningful ways.

[Ballygrl]

A lot of them say yes, but the people they need to vote for Obama? no freaking way do they want to pay more.

[USA4ME]

The primitives remind me of the story of two old farmer friends who are walking down the road and talking.  One says to the other...

"If you had two cars would you let me have one of them?"
"Yes, as my friend I would give you one."
"And if you had two houses would you let me have one of them?"
"As good of friends as we are, you know I would give you one of them."
"And if you had two mules, would you give one of them to me?"
"You're my friend, man, you know I would."
"Let me ask you, if you had two hogs would you give me one of them?"
"Aw man, you know I got two hogs."

.

[Wineslob]

MadHound (31,096 posts)

Would you be willing to pay more in taxes?

NO

How about the Govt cut back, say 25%, in SSI, EBT, WELFARE,  etc...............or is that beyond your comprehension?

[wasp69]

MadHound (31,096 posts)

Would you be willing to pay more in taxes?

Silly DUmmie, democrats don't pay taxes, especially the ultra rich ones. 

[BEG]

I though Bush's tax cuts were for only the rich?   

[jukin]

Wouldn't the DUchebags first have to actually pay taxes instead of stealing money from others?

A better question for the leeches at the DUmp would be, "Would you be willing to take a cut in the goodies that the government gives you?"

We all know the answer to that question.

[JohnnyReb]

The short answer is  and the long answer is NO!

[Kyle Ricky]

What we have in this country is not a tax problem, it is a spending problem. The Demtards want to spend more, so of course they have to tax more to get what they call "Revenue". If they would make drastic cuts, I might consider paying more in taxes. As long as it doesn't go above 30%. They will never get it to where it was when Eisenhower, or Carter was President. There isn't a person a live who would agree with paying from 70% to 90%. Even the liberals. I find it kinda funny because when you ask a liberal what rate they feel would be appropriate, they won't answer you. They want to say 70% or higher, but they know if they do, people will cane them.

I was talking to a individual yesterday about taxes and he was telling me that during WWII taxes were as high as 95%, and he insisted that that was what got us out of the depression. 

[Happy Fun Ball]

They may say they're willing to pay more taxes (or in their case, taxes period), but when it comes time to actually back up their claim and pay more, they will scream and moan and howl and complain and bang their heads on their keyboards and whine and caterwaul and scream some more.

For a good example of this, look at Wisconsin. Those unions were asked to pay a palty amount into their pensions (what was it, 7% or so?), and look at the hell that broke out as a result.

Also France and Greece.

[Karin]

Would you be willing to pay more in taxes?

HELL NO 

[obumazombie]

Did Timothy "TurboTaxCheat" Geitner ever pay back his 6 years of unpaid taxes ? There were so many in the owebuma administration with the same problem, I thought it was a prerequisite.

[Rebel]

Look at this exchange:

slackmaster (53,324 posts)
6. My income is a bit more than $49,900, and it's tightly budgeted to allow for retirement planning

A multi-thousand dollar hit would be painful, and would require me to cut back on savings.

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to slackmaster (Reply #6)]

9. So you would rather put your own personal planning ahead of the good of the country?

Seriously? Because there is absolutely no way that we're going to get the tax cuts for the rich to expire while simultaneously extending them for the not so rich. And frankly, we need the revenue.

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #9)]
15. absolutely, hell yes

because there is ZERO guarantee that the gov't will ever do what it SAYS it will do with the money that it takes from my pay. believing the the gov't will pay down, cut military spending, put aside money for social programs, etc is foolhardy at best.

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #15)]

21. Well hell then, we all might as well become rabid RWer's then,

Just look out for ourselves first and only, and damn the rest of the country.

There are no guarantees in this life period, not just in government. Sure, we could keep the tax cuts, blow up the debt even further, and watch the nation go bankrupt. Then where would you be? I'd rather increase the revenue that we need, and hash out the particulars, than not have the revenue and go down the toilet.

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #21)]

24. when the people in congress start to look out for the country

then and only then will i be on board... they are only in gov't to line their pockets and peddle influence. i won't believe it until i see it... they have been lying for about four decades now.

you can send them all the money you want and get mad when they piss it away on more war and whatnot...it is all a ****ing joke. the revenue WILL go down the toilet. it is like a crack addict say, just gimme a few more bucks and i promise i won't go back to the dealer...

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #24)]

26. Geez, you sound like my grandpa

Going on about the evils of the Roosevelt administration waaaay back in the day.

So I guess you want to starve government to the point where it can be drowned in a bathtub, right?

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #26)]

28. i want the gov't to show me that it actually WILL do something about spending

but you go ahead and believe that they'll reform. it doesn't matter how much money you give them...they're going to spend it...not use it to pay down debt...and we'll end up broke anyway.

i won't know you in 20 years...but if i did i would be able to tell you i told you so.

i don't want the gov't to drown...i want the gov't to drain the ****ing bathtub to a point where it can always be above water and free from the threat of insolvency!

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #28)]

38. Umm, in case you haven't been paying attention,

Government has been cutting spending for the past few years. Cutting spending has resulted in throwing millions of government workers out of work, teachers, construction workers, etc. Is that what you want? More misery, a worse economy? Because we can't continue down the road we're on, handing out tax cuts while consigning the least among us to doing without.

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #38)]

42. let's talk about the couple of hundred billion

that we have pissed away on a war or two...have you TOTALLY missed that bit? maybe some of the waste would be of interest to you? can you be THAT myopic?

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #42)]

48. No, not at all,

I'm fully on record around here about wanting to cut the military budget in half, now. But I also recognize the reality that until we get some radical new leadership in office, the military is going to be barely be touched by spending cuts, while domestic spending, spending that helps out ordinary folks, that spending is what gets slashed and burned every single time. We don't need that to happen now, not while the regular folks in this country are already staggering.

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #48)]

50. you have made my point nicely

give them more money...and they'll piss it away on shit that just kills more people either directly or indirectly.

when they can correct the madness, i will gladly pay more...

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #50)]

54. So you're willing to watch the rest of us starve

Just because they wouldn't address your pet peeve.

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #54)]

58. get the point!

they're NOT GOING TO SPEND IT ON YOU! no matter how much you give them they will piss it away...YOU DON'T MATTER TO THEM. YOU NEVER WILL. Not the people who are running the show now. it doesn't matter WHAT i do...

funny how you think about a $1,000,000,000,000 on war is just a 'pet peeve'...

sP

MadHound (31,100 posts) [Response to ProdigalJunkMail (Reply #58)]

60. No, they might not spend it on me,

But when they don't get their revenue, you know whose ass their going to come after(again) to get their pound of flesh? Not the military, oh no. You and me. They've already cut domestic spending, they'll cut it more and more, including Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. No school lunches, no funds for education. Is that what you want?

ProdigalJunkMail (9,120 posts) [Response to MadHound (Reply #60)]

63. and why the **** do you think giving them more money now would fix that?

our gov't is the living definition of insanity. they're going to cut the spending on those programs NO MATTER WHAT YOU GIVE THEM. the people in power now have proven it over and over and over and over...the people that are in there can **** off.

i will not feed them ANY MORE until they prove they are going to FIX the programs you mention...and the people that are there WILL NOT.

and the sad part is, you KNOW this. you already pointed it out. but you live in this fantasy where somehow giving them more money will make social programs better off...only you can correct your fantasy...but you have to be willing to.

sP

Basically, other than that, it's a bunch of people that don't want their shit touched, and if it is, touched for something "they" agree with, but nothing else. This is why we can't have nice things.

[obumazombie]

Quote from Madhound...

"So I guess you want to starve government to the point where it can be drowned in a bathtub, right?"

Wrong. I would settle for bathtub gin.

[Danglars]

This is all just fantasy, and there is no reason on earth for ANYONE in the US to pay more taxes, and every reason to pay LESS than than the "Bush" tax cuts permit. Tax rates need to be cut MORE, for good ethical reasons--levels are already confiscatory--and good macroeconomic reasons, which I consider secondary to the ethical reasons.

The feds have borrowed and spent us into this mess. FIRST, yes, the beast, government, DOES need to be starved and if not drowned in the bathtub, at least waterboarded until it cries and goes limp.

[USA4ME]

I find it funny the primitive says this is the view of RWers...

MadHound

Just look out for ourselves first and only, and damn the rest of the country.

... and then goes on to promote the continuance of the very social programs that are the essance of "look out for ourselves first and only, and damn the rest of the country."

.

[BEG]

my poorness can beat your poorness

notadmblnd (15,965 posts)
1. I'm not gonna miss 5 or 10 dollars a week

pitohui (20,437 posts)
92. well how nice for you, i've earned $300 in a year

there are many of us who are unemployed and truly suffering in this economy

$5-10 a week is more than i've earned this last 12 months

let the rich pay the taxes and those who are self congratulatory pay the taxes

most of us are hurting

 

notadmblnd (15,965 posts)
93. oh yeah, I'm on easy street alright

I made a whopping 16k cleaning toilets for the rich.

But yeah, I still manage to throw 240.00 -500.00 a year away on things I don't absolutely need. There was nothing in my post that was self congratulatory, all I said was that I was willing to sacrifice five or ten a week. The real point of my post was that these "tax breaks" that we've all been so fortunate to have been bestowed upon us, really isn't that much on a weekly basis in take home pay. Furthermore, if you've only made 300.00 in the last year, you paid no taxes on it- and even with the tax cuts expiring- you're still not going to pay any taxes on 300.00 of income.

I'm sorry that you are going through tough time but you don't need to lash out at me because you are frustrated and angry about your situation and I didn't answer the OPs question the with answer that what you wanted to hear.

[wasp69]

pitohui (20,437 posts)
92. well how nice for you, i've earned $300 in a year

there are many of us who are unemployed and truly suffering in this economy

Really?  How did that happen?



Oh, nevermind....

[Karin]

Thanks for rowing that back over, Rebel.  That was fun.

Madhound truly believes that income can only come from government.  "We're all going to starve."  Well, you could always go look for a job.  

ProdJnkmail and Slackmaster should join the TEA party.

Here's this asshole again:

Response to MadHound (Original post)
Wed Jun 6, 2012, 06:15 PM
 Chan790 (12,316 posts)
33. I'm already on the record as "Yes".

I'm rich, please tax me more.

[Wineslob]

pitohui (20,437 posts)
92. well how nice for you, i've earned $300 in a year

there are many of us who are unemployed and truly suffering in this economy

$5-10 a week is more than i've earned this last 12 months

let the rich pay the taxes and those who are self congratulatory pay the taxes

most of us are hurting

On the innerwebz...............how? Not looking for a job much, are you?

[dane]

I wonder if DUmmy Madhound (initiated the DUmmy thread) is aware that he can send a check to the IRS.  A win/win - his tax is effectively increased making him happy, and the taxes of those who don't agree with him are left alone.

But I betcha he has NOT sent a donation to the IRS, merely typed about increases while sitting in the basement, building up DUcred.

[GOBUCKS]

I wonder if DUmmy Madhound (initiated the DUmmy thread) is aware that he can send a check to the IRS. 

And the amount of that check should be deductible on next year's Schedule A. It's win-win-win!