• #13
    HMMM...Obama says tax the rich! Ok, let's say the "rich" (over $250,000/yr) total income yearly is 1 trillion dollars. Obama raises their tax 10%. 1 trillion X 10%= 100 billion. Ok, let's apply that money to our debt ONLY (presently at 16.5 trillion). WITHOUT interest, it would take 165 years to pay it off! 16,500,000,000,000 / 100,000,000,000 = 165. AND, that's without interest. Great math there Mr. President! Go to school very long?
    >> Reduce the budget, then talk about "raise the taxes" for the next "raise" will be on YOU <<<
  • #17
    "Great math there Mr. President! Go to school very long?" Actually, he went to Harvard, just like the economist who is quoted in this article. Telling us that the economist went to school at Harvard is supposed to make him more credible as a man who is intelligent and well trained, but that doesn't apply to the President, of course.

    One question regarding your little story problem, how long will it take to pay off the $16.5 trillion WITHOUT raising taxes?
  • #21
    @Dan_Tien Good question. But, it doesn't matter if we don't reduce the budget!
    " Reduce the budget, then talk about "raise the taxes" "
    So, I would have to answer with "& years" (turn that "&" sideways, it's the closest I could find to the infinity sign on my keyboard) LOL
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #54
    @stepped_in_it raise taxes on those over $500000, just back to the Clinton era tax rates. And hike capital gains on a tiered system. Longer the investment, lower the taxes. Encourage long term investment and growth. And lastly cut the budget. End the foreign occupations, stop meddling in the middle east. Stop the war on marijuana (regulate and tax it). And lastly invest in education and infrastructure, but let the states decide how to run their education, medical and infrastructure programs.
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    Except for social security fund actually pays for your other shit, and is in fact the most self sufficient program US has. You dumb idiot
  • #10
    Here's a thought. Let Social Security Contributions and the remaining fund pay for ONLY Social Security and medicare. The seniors will get what they earned and the rest can get it from someone else. Seniors are tired of paying for people to lay on their ass and get absolutely free medicaid when we don't.
  • #4
    We have dug a hole so deep that just cutting spending won't solve anything. And just raising taxes on the "other guy" is downright stupid. We need to raise revenue. And since the options here are raise taxes or cut spending I have chosen this response.
    We need to cut taxes across the board AND cut spending! The left just doesn't want to hear that each and every time taxes are cut, revenue increases! But the IDIOTS in Washington see that money and SPEND IT!
    Woodrow Wilson left this country in a depression. Harding cut taxes AND spending and the economy exploded. Hoover was a Progressive and went back to the tax and spend ways and we got another depression. Personally, I truly believe we need to toss the entire 77,000 page tax code into the woodstove and start over with a fair tax where EVERYBODY pays their "fair share".
  • #62
    What kind of choice is this?
    (A) raise (struggling) middle-income tax or
    (B) cut spending

    How about this instead:
    (C) raise income tax on Billionaires to 90%
  • #61
    I Tell you what we need to do is cut down on the amount of financial aid that we allow to the public excluding the old and the REAL disabled people. But the unemployed, we can fix that by simply career coaching have that be a free thing that we offer so that these people don't just say screw it the government is paying for it any way. Also we'll have less bums.
  • #45
    Politix, not that I would tap it, but you've let off an important option. You need a "we don't need to increase revenue or cut spending" option for people who don't mind racking up national debt.
  • #75
    100 votes up for you, Kid. You hit the nail right on the head. Why should WE, the American taxpayer, be stuck with the bill for years and years of mismanagement and overspending?

    How would we feel if our neighbor went to Vegas and used his credit card to rack up hundreds of thousands in debt and then the credit card company sent the bill to us? That's exactly what Washington has done to us?
  • #27
    Two things the media will not talk about: corporate welfare and 70% of mass killers being white males. There is a common thread between corporations and mass killing that drives both of them.
  • #26
    The "sacred cow" is the ultra-rich tax breaks, which must stop or be reduced if the rich are to continue to get their corporate welfare, which overwhelms all social welfare and makes it look like a pee in the ocean.
  • #8
    Am I supposed to be surprised that Mitt Romney's former advisor is repeating the same message after the election is over?
  • #16
    Am I entitled to suspect that the total amount of money that is reported as being spent on our "precious entitlements" includes the wages and generous benefits paid to the government employees in the bloated bureaucracy that manages them, and that any proposed cuts to those programs will not come from reducing the numbers of those employees or the money paid to them?
  • #19
    @Dan_Tien Of course not. And they will still need 4 levels of supervisors to approve a new social security card for the victim of identity theft. I know this one for a fact. I could have gotten an illegal one for 500.00 and 20 minutes from the Mexicans that was actually a facsimile of my actual one easier than I got mine replaced from the govt.
  • #2
    The ONLY way I could ever, under any circumstance agree to having my taxes rise would be to see an actual plan to reduce the deficit to zero and hold the President and Congress to it.

    These people in Washington work for us. We are not their subjects.?They are our Representatives. They must be reminded of this, as they are messing with OUR money, not theirs.
  • #41
    Boehner wants cuts from Obama, but Obama is refusing. He only wants the tax increases and there's been nothing on spending cuts. I don't mind if my taxes go up either as long as there will be meaningful cuts that will start reducing our debt.
  • #83
    @AceLuby Boehner agreed to tax increases. Obama has to put forward the cuts! Now, we don't have to worry, because everything is going to be cut!
  • #87
    @methinks That doesn't make any sense. It's the gop that wants the cuts, so why would it be up to dems to offer them? The gop didn't offer the tax increases, the agreed to part of what dems want, the next step is for the other side to now define what they want. That's how it works.
  • #90
    @AceLuby both of you have proven why Washington is dysfunctional. Neither side knows what the other is doing or even what they should do. Both sides should be offering cuts and a spending budget, but they don't because they don't care about their constituents. They only care about how they will be perceived in the media, what names they will be called and how they can position themselves for their next election. The deals that are being made benefit no one.
  • R Load more replies

  • #1
    Everyone knows this. the question is, when do we implement those taxes? right now and stifle the anemic recovery from the recession and risk sliding back into one or do we wait until we are back on our feet and then do what we all know we need to do?
  • #59
    We have been invading countries and bailing out banks on the credit card too long now. If Gore would have been elected we would have eliminated the debt by now.
  • #64
    @armed_liberal, you are absolutely correct. Gore would have strengthened environment laws too. Bush let them languish horribly
  • #93
    we the people are responsible, for allowing our representatives spend, spend, spend foolishly like their is no tomorrow. until now there's almost is, no tomorrow left for us all. the federal government, is not designed to do everything for everybody. no government can do that, without denying your unalienable rights. the government doing everything for you, shall cost you all your freedom. as you all become slaves, to a police, fascist, or nazi, or socialist communist state. and we have all seen, how well those did not work out either.
  • #79
    "... if US citizens plan to enjoy the level of welfare they've come to expect, they're either going to have to pony up..."

    Were we to have LEADERSHIP from the person ELECTED to be in the White House rather than his admitted Marxist Svengali and Handler in Chicago with a commitment to fixing the economy rather than hiring a voter pool for the next election, welfare and "entitlements" would get under control. Less money paid to people who sit on their ass means less taken from people working theirs off.

    It's simple... and frankly,@PolitixDain, your propagandist skills need some polish as your obvious bias is showing...

    "And if you're looking for evidence that a counterfactual Romney presidency would be no guarantee of a low tax regime, Mankiw provides it: "An unwavering commitment to keep middle-class taxes low could be one reason the political process has become so deeply dysfunctional." " Joey Goebbels would be disappointed.
  • #74
    Time to Start Milking the Sacred Cow!?!?! WTF?!?!?

    It's hard to believe some of the things coming out of the mouths of those who will want votes for either themselves or their associates in the future.
  • #65
    Republicans want to cut spending. Zero of the far left Liberal Democrats running this country want to cut spending, including the Idiot in Chief. They also want to take in very little tax revenue by keeping the brakes on economic growth in this country for the sake of left wind ideology - green energy, stifling regulations, high business taxes to discourage hiring, etc. This will work for perhaps 2 or 3 more years. When Obama has succeeded in bringing the debt from $10T when he took office in 2008 to perhaps $24T by 2016, the world will make the decision for more foreign lenders available, high interest rates due to our high risk of default. Then Draconian cuts to all entitlements will be required, AND likely much higher taxes for everyone, including the middle class and the poor. Thanks Obama.
  • #55
    We will need higher taxes, but in order to really attack the debt problem there must be cuts as well. The goal is to get the debt on a downward trend while minimizing the pain to actual humans.
    Corporations are on their own.
    Depletion allowances will have to go, just as the cap on social security contributions will have to rise or be eliminated.
    Anyone can solve this problem, it's a matter of will. If we all wrote our congresspersons to tell them what we expect, it might stiffen their spines a little.
  • R Load more comments...