• #23
    Not at all, If they went after the obscenely wealthy Republican puppetmasters, they would have to go after the obscenely wealthy Democrat puppetmasters. We know that's not going to happen. No it' will be the moderately wealthy and middle-class that get fleeced as usual.
  • #116
    You mean people like George Soros, Michael Moore, most of Hollywood. I agree, tax them at 95% and also impose a net worth tax of 50%. That will cut the country down to size.
  • #10
    The head of the President's Council of Economic Advisers told a group of DC insiders Friday that any feeling among the rich that the government is out to get them is needless "hyperventilating,"

    The rich are making money and collecting assets under this administration.

    Its the middle class getting stuck up the pooper.
  • #6
    When one is a billionaire, your only fear is losing wealth. Or so I've heard.
    Of course they should be concerned. And it's about time.
  • #18
    Why should you steal their money? What right do you have to take away anything the earned lawfully? They didn't rob a bank, they built a company, risked their money and got the reward. Anything that steals, for no good reason other than you want some of what they got, is just wrong. You damn well don't have a right to anything we earned, we earned it by working hard, legally. Really, in a dark alley you and your ilk would just be common thieves.
  • #21
    @Tralee : Don't make me laugh. Hard work? Smart work, maybe. More likely ruthless and cunning.
    Do you see any correlation between the massive deficits that Reagan and Bush created and the increase in wealth for the 1%?
    If you don't, you're blind. I might have an ounce of respect for you if you were one of the 1%. But if you're not, your a fool to support them.
    Meanwhile all of the taxes that you and I paid that should have created world class infrastructures and educations were stolen.
  • #26
    @UScentral It's MY money, WE worked long hours for it, YOU can't have it. Clear? Um - we are in the 1%- any professional has no problem being there, you only have to make about $350,000 and above. We probably pay more in taxes every year than you even make. Again, it's OUR money, we earned it legally and lawfully and it's OURS not yours. Just like my cars are MINE, you can't have one, same with coats, shoes, or anything else. They are MINE, get your own.
  • #44
    @Tralee Yes indeed! I feel exactly the same way. I make lots of contributions and help.those around me in need. But my earnings that I worked for do not belong to anyone else. Wealth in itself is not evil. Greed is. But libs want the easy path to wealth in redistribution.
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    We are closer to a tyrannical government than this country has ever been. They are passing laws to hide their corruption from the public and the press, building an over-reaching government, collecting illegal data on all citizens. The entire country, including the 1% are at risk. Once the point of no return is reached, when there is not enough taxes to pay all the expanding government programs, the 1%ers will be a target as there is little middle class left and it is dwindling rapidly, the working class are stressed now.
  • #27
    @NolanVoyd Well I was just told the other day on this very site that anyone who can afford to stay home or even work only part-time while their spouse works is "rich". See what I'm getting at here and why referring to "THE rich" is a slippery slope? ;)
  • #29
    ! is a manner of perspective.....but the political debate lately.....going back to the Romney campaign, occupy wall street etc. and even according to this article is the so called 1%......which is simple is the top 1% of income earners in the country.
  • #30
    Ooops....a "matter" of perspective....not "manner" of correct does not always auto correct.
  • #31
    @NolanVoyd I wish Politix would offer an "EDIT" option! I assume they don't to keep the debates honest so someone can't go back and change what they said later :/
  • R Load more replies

  • #1
    Not yet.... but soon, soon.

    This country built a middle class with a 91% top tax rate. Not only did this 91% tax rate not hurt, it helped the country grow. None of these plutocrats left then and none would leave if we did it again. The difference between now and back then is that the people controlled the government back then. Now the 1%ers do. Eventually the poor and middle class who are becoming the new poor will get tired of it and will take that power back.

    So 1%ers while you are not under attack by the government now you will be expected to pay more in the future.

  • #8
    @Linebacker66 Strong unions built the middle class. You can see the decline since Reagan broke the unions. Many of these union idiots have only themselves to blame - they voted (R) and had their livelihoods destroyed forever.
  • #13
    @PNWest • WWII resulted in a booming post war American economy which created the middle class. The unions of the time protected workers and did a good job of it. Then most (not all) unions became worse than the very thing they were designed to protect the workers from. Solidarity in the workforce can be a good thing, it can also screw you right out of a job if the wrong people are involved.
  • #14
    Sigh, you Progressives love to cite this, we rational and intelligent conservatives love to shoot it down, again and again. Approx. 4 people actually paid this 91% rate - it looked good on paper, but no one paid a rate that high and no one would. Even you wouldn't settle for bringing home 9 cents on the dollar for working even a 40 hour week. Nope, just a pipe dream and I am getting tired of cutting through this constant barrage of false and misleading Progressive propaganda.
  • R Load more replies

  • #65
    Using the standard definition of the wealthy, people with enough wealth that they don't need to work, they don't have a lot to fear from Obama yet. For the wealthy, it is all about the tax codes, and those are complex enough that you can hide all the money you want. The people getting hammered are the middle class, who are characterized by having "income," basically, checks from other people that can be tracked.

    Many wealthy people like Bloomberg, Buffet, and others seem to like Obama well enough because their personal wealth is growing through the Fed's stock manipulation.
  • #3
    When the owners of corporations can buy local, state, and national elections with only other rich people outspending them to worry about and when their businesses themselves can get exemptions based on religious reasons from healthcare laws they should not be worried at all.

    Not about the government at least.
  • #4
    Why would those exemptions not be okay? Religious freedom as written in the Constitution trumps any kind of illegal healthcare laws that serve to enslave us all under the yoke of government tyranny.....
  • #37
    @Knightkore because corporations are not people so a corporation should not have religious freedom.

    If you were told by your companies owner that you could no longer pray at your lunch time, wear your cross jewelry, or decorate your desk with Christian nik naks at all but everything that was Islam was ok, because he a muslim and so is his company so anything against that is banned would you be fine with that?

    What about a hindu corporation not allowing its employees to consume meat?

    A satanist owner who says you must sacrifice a goat on your way to work?

    Apparently you would be because you want religion to overrule the minority and the individual.

    You are no American.
  • #41
    @BobSmith you don't pay taxes regardless of abortion being legal or not so you don't pay for it anyways if you're a church. You'll sure as hell force your view on everyone that does pay taxes though and cry religious freedom the whole time.
  • R Load more replies

  • #105
    Anyone has a good reason to feel under attack by the current government. The rich however, have no reason to worry being taxed to the poor house.
  • #102
    The truly wealthy are in on the Beltway-Wall Street oligarch scam. Entire industries get enormous subsidies: healthcare, housing, higher ed, food, transportation, ag, and oh yeah the military. Any smart investor is already latched onto those tits and milking the middle class dry-- so they can comfort the growing underclass. That's the growing market.
  • #70
    Making the rich pay more taxes is not "class welfare" its the right thing to do. Rich people are the reason the economy is stagner. Its only fare the top 1% who control more wealth than the rest of the 99% many many times over pay more in taxes...
  • #68
    Obama is more about take from the rich and give it to the poor, and the hell with the middle class. That's not what he preaches, but that's how it is right now.
  • #61
    Are you kidding me? All these new age Socialists do is attack the rich, constantly blaming them for all the ills of America. Democrats are truly ideologs who would watch our great nation shrivel up & die while they constantly attack the job creators. What losers. Government is the problem, not rich people.
  • #28
    And we should be talking about marginal tax rates of 70% again, the way it used to be during the period of our most vigorous growth, the 1950s.
  • #49
    I know this is a liberal talking point, so all the libs have to put it out there again, but as I said before (and will likely have to say again) the top tax rate is MEANINGLESS in reality. It's the amount of taxes ACTUALLY PAID that matters. If the top tax rate is 100%, some liberals will be happy - even if nobody pays it because of the deductions.

    When we had a 91% top tax rate, there were thousands more deductions than we have now. You could even deduct credit card interest or interest on buying your car. 100% of your medical expenses were deductible, and "martini lunches" were deducted legally.

    Before you make this erroneous claim again, here are a few unbiased references for your to read. Their quick, easy reads and I've not included any overtly conservative sites. ... ... ... ...
  • #69

    "When we had a 91% top tax rate, there were thousands more deductions than we have now. You could even deduct credit card interest or interest on buying your car. 100% of your medical expenses were deductible, and "martini lunches" were deducted legally. "

    It's odd you mentioning that, because those were deductions that favored the working class, not the wealthy.

    Not all those deductions are gone, but rates are lower, and effective rates for the wealthy are very low indeed, because capital gains and carried interest both get very favorable tax treatment.

    Was that the point you were intending?
  • #75
    @viniketa Weird. Apparently Politix is truncating the links. I got these by googling "tax rates 1950s" and if I try to copy the link to here, it gets truncated. Guess you'll have to go google. I don't know any way around it.
  • #77
    @Cincinnatus My point it the rich didn't pay 91% then and they don't pay 39.6%(the top rate for 2013) now. The top rate is IRRELEVANT. What matters is how much they actually pay.

    The top 10% pay over 70% of the tax dollars collected.

    The top 1% will pay about 30% of the tax dollars collected.
    The bottom 20% pay -0.4% of the tax dollars collected (that means they get back more than they paid in)

    Even the Huffington Post disagrees with you. And I think you'll agree they aren't a conservative source.
  • R Load more replies

  • #17
    Poor little rich people......paying way less in taxes then they have historically......stock market booming......their wealth increasing while everyone elses' stagnates.......I almost want to cry thinking about how hard it must be for them to be under attack so.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #19
    Politix Diplomat
    Thanks for your comment @Tralee, but when posting a quote or referencing another site, we ask that you only include a short abstract (try not to copy/paste more than a paragraph from another source). Also don't forget to include a link to the original source.

    Without this proper formatting, posts can be removed due to copyright violation.

    Feel free to re-post with the proper formatting.

  • #20
    @FenceSitter - thanks, now I have to write it all over again? I guess the truth is not too welcome anymore on Topix. First the vote down with targets any conservative comment now this. Well, I'm not at all surprised, I'm just surprised it took this long for the censors to start stamping down on anything that contradicted with the "Party Line". Freedom of speech used to go both ways.
  • #22
    Politix Diplomat
    @Tralee Thanks for your reply. As mentioned, this has more to do with copyright law. Short abstracts only, please.

    Your post wasn't removed because of its subject matter.

    - FenceSitter
  • #24
    Well, since we have been under attack since Obama first took office, it's a little hard to think things will change anytime soon. A few sentences from the Henninger article "Obama's State of Disunion". If you want to read the article, type in "Henningers article on Obama's state of disunion" in your search engine.

    "Dividing the nation in his first term so that some Americans would vote in anger against his opposition was clearly the game plan from the start. He repeatedly scapegoated "the wealthiest" and the "1 percent."

    "After four years of the politics of divide-and-conquer, Mr. Obama had stirred sufficient resentment in his political base to win a second term. "

    "Segments of the U.S. population see themselves not just in disagreement with the Obama administration, but as the target of its policies."

    Those included are, the 1%, the upper-middle class, Southern states, charter schools, politically active conservatives, private businesses, the Catholic church, electric utilities, doctors driven out of ObamaCare's health networks and most recently, the Little Sisters of the Poor.

    "All have been vilified, investigated, audited or sued by the president himself, Eric Holder's Justice Department, the National Labor Relations Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and, not least, the Internal Revenue Service."
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #119
    constantly mentioned and targeted by the president sure they should feel under attack, they are. this administration cant lead so they try and deflect attention towards others.
  • R Load more comments...