Best
70 Comments
Post
  • #10
    !
    Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    Instead of asking those who already pay to pay even more, what's wrong with asking that 47 percent to pay SOMETHING? The free ride needs to end. Step up.
  • #40
    !
    As usual, you hit the nail on the head. I like this one better, even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while. Put that out and wait for the screaming from the left, they'd be happy if they all got a free ride and the few of us paid it all. They need to move to Cuba.
  • #24
    !
    I'm on the bottom, and I'd be glad to pay more taxes as contribute to my country. People always talk about making the rich pay their fair share, but I live here too and pay not much more than just sales tax.

    Sure, in general I think income taxes are wrong - but if we are going to have them, at least make them fair.
  • #49
    !
    Fairness has to consider how much harder it is for a poor person to lose a portion of their money versus a rich person.
  • #53
    !
    @CommonSense we've beat that dead horse. Many of the so called "poor" live every bit as well as I do. They have all the same "goodies", often times more than I do. Yet I pay a 5 digit figure in taxes after its all said and done. They paid nothing and in many instances actually get back more than they paid in at the end of the year. I really don't think it's too much to ask for EVERYONE to actually contribute something.
  • #56
    !
    @Nemesis3X
    What gives you the impression they live "every bit" as well as you do? And if that's the case then why not quit your job and start doing something simpler for less money if you really don't think being poor effects how well you live.
  • #57
    !
    @CommonSense I have eyes (and a welfare queen as a sister). As to quitting? As soon as my children have all left the nest and I am no longer indentured to the ex, I plan on doing just that!!! That's what happens when the redistribution of wealth starts. Eventually you run out of producers.
  • #55
    !
    Actually Romney lost.
    Let me explain before your brain explodes.

    Romney wanted the government to delegate the following
    Gay rights
    Women's rights
    Civil rights
    Free enterprise

    Romney was all about taking the rights of some to ensure the happiness of others, like yourself.
    He lost Obama won move on please
  • #58
    !
    @Cool_voter
    I've moved on, I acknowledged we must now pay for what Obama promised, he never said how he was going to pay for it but some of us figured it out. I wish more would have but we are all in this together now, just accept it, that's all we can do, the majority spoke, all this free stuff is expensive!!
    ( maybe we can get him elected a third term and just have our wages sent directly to him? Think of the money saved by eliminating the middleman!!)
  • #35
    !
    Look at individual states or even cities to see what works. The ones that stick to a budget , promote an enviroment that is friendly to business, use commonsense when it comes enviromental issues, prospet. The ones that spend , spend , spend, and then tax tax tax, then cater to unions and enviromental radicals, decline. We have the models to show us what works and what doesnt. Texas vs california.
  • #23
    !
    Wow...did ole Howard suddenly see the light? Hell yes, everyone needs to pay their fair share...ain't that what Barack Husssein Obama keeps saying? But...NO, NO, they don't need to pay MORE taxes, they need to pay THEIR FAIR SHARE. And, 35% on a family making $250K is plenty. If you want to raise capital gains taxes, OK. But, remember, that affects more than just the rich.
    I do wonder, however, what might happen if we raise taxes 1% across the board, lower corporate taxes to a competive level with other countries, raise the minimum wage 25cents/hr., adjust the Social Security and Medicare age for those under 50 y/o, cut federal spending, and cap the debt ceiling. That way nobody WINS, and everyone SHARES in some way. But, the fly in the ointment is Obamacare. That crap is going to negatively affect everyone...and that is a fact. No matter how we stimulate the economy to grow the GDP, Obamacare will retard its growth. And, all who hate "trickle-down" economics will soon see what "government-forced" economics will do.
  • #42
    !
    Maybe you should have run for president, this is the common sense way to balance the budget. Families do it all the time.
  • #44
    !
    @Tralee No way the White House and Oval Office is ready for a Blue Dog Democrat like me. The rich elite of both parties would have little or no influence and the lazy takers would have to go to work. Our foreign policy would directly reflect how other countries treat our nation. And our borders would be secured.
    Prayer would be back in the White House...for traditional American religious leaders. So, you see, someone like me just cannot be elected.
  • #46
    !
    @seedtick I'd vote for you. A little common sense would go a long way in Washington DC about now. I don't want influence, I want a balanced budget, my taxes not wasted and for politicians to call the green thing with all the colored lights and ornaments on it to celebrate the season, what it is, a Christmas Tree.
  • #13
    !
    I would not be against higher taxes for everyone and some severe cuts in discretionary spending, particularly Defense. Entitlements, specifically Social Security I would leave the Hell alone. Medicaid and medicare, well, I am not sure.

    I was against the Bush Tax cuts right from the beginning. What I feared would happen did happen. They need that money back. So take it. Hit us all hard and get it over with.
  • #16
    !
    I agree to a point. Although I don't like the idea, I think we're going to have to means test SSI. I also think the federal pension system needs reform.
  • #17
    !
    @Thunderchicken - For the short term there is no need to mess with SS. It is solvent and according to everyone will be for quite a few years. Let's get the rest of our house in order and then look at it.
  • #18
    !
    The spending cuts I agree with wholeheartedly. Tax increases no. Tax fairness is what I'm thinking. Everyone paying the same %. There's no reason why a low wage earner should be paying taxes at a higher percentage than those in the top brackets. And get rid of all this 'income tax return" BS. It goes in, it stays in. Do away with offshore tax havens also. There are many ways to increase tax revenue without raising them. It's just that those with the political clout (money) won't let it happen.
  • #26
    !
    @MRMacrum

    But SSI is a big part of our spending.(The lock box, trust fund went out the window a long time ago. Like it or not SSI is part of the general fund.) With our biggest expenses being Medicare, SSI and Defense, that's likely where we'll get our biggest spending cuts.
  • #30
    !
    @Hrsqsiest

    Are you talking "Pay as you go" taxes such as a national sales tax? I'd be all for something where the average Joe knows just how much he pays in all taxes combined. It'd probably get Joe so made he'd demand spending cuts.
  • R Load more replies

  • #33
    !
    @PoliticalSpice

    You aren't telling me anything I don't already know. Washington is so bass ackwards that I expect stupidity from them.

    But I keep pestering my reps any way. Maybe some day they'll wake up.
  • #36
    !
    @Thunderchicken
    Well I may not agree with your politics, but if more people would pester their reps maybe this system would start being more responsive and the level of public debate would improve...
  • #38
    !
    @PoliticalSpice

    I have the tar. Will you get the feathers? ;-)

    Seriously, I think we both want the best for our country. We probably differ more on how to get it rather than what it is.
  • #69
    !
    NO, what a stupid thing to say. The government needs budget cuts and to freeze spending. You can't keep looking at the American people to bail Washington out.
  • #66
    !
    Mr. Dean is PARTIALLY correct. Everybody needs to pay taxes; he just got the "more" part wrong. The rates are fine as they are, it'll just take some creative will to get everyone on board with the idea of business philanthropy.
  • #65
    !
    Yes everyone needs to pay higher taxes americains wine about everything they say the roads bridges and schools suck then turn around and bitch and moan about taxes being to high their complete idiots they expect a certain standard of living and they don't want to pay for it
  • #63
    !
    If you want something to shirk you have to quit feeding it. The government is no different. The more money we have feed it the bigger it has gotten. No matter how much cash it shakes us down for it will never be enough. The best government is a government that governs the least. You want a better more effective government then we have to put it on a diet. As painful as hunger pains are. And it will cry its starving as it is now even being over feed. Its time to place some real limits on its ability to tax. There no fixing this tax system. It has to be scraped there is no other way it doesn't and can't work period.
  • #62
    !
    Well heres the truth.

    When ever a Democrat says "Tax the Rich"
    it always means "Tax Everyone"
    and when do the 49% of people who pay NO taxes pay their fair share?
    and when do the people on welfare who live better than working folks get to pay their fair share?
    also what is a fair share 60%? 70%? 80%?
    what is it!
    when you add in federal tax state tax sales tax gasoline tax property tax and more all the working class only keep about 28% or what they earn.
    When is enough enough?
  • #61
    !
    "It's a verboten concept for progressives, he admits"

    Another "verboten concept for progressives" is to call the Left on their word games... Semantics. Palin gets ridicule for predicting "Death Panels" (IPAB) but is that any different than Hillary Clinton acknowledging that Russia is trying to "re-Sovietize the region"?

    Clinton vows to thwart new Soviet Union

    “It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that,” she said, referring to various iterations of a Moscow-backed plan to deepen economic ties with its neighbours.

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a5b15b14-3fcf-...
  • #41
    !
    Dean shows another reason why he couldn't even win his party's nomination for president -- he's not rooted in reality
  • R Load more comments...
Post