Biden calls TEa Party "'terrorists"

[wtf]

I think a flat tax is more equitable than a consumption tax

takes all the loopholes away , elements all the sleezy tax lawyers, and does not hit the middle class as hard which is necessary for an economy to thrive-PLUS you will get more people willing to pay

[Dirty Sanchez]

Well it's better than be called T-baggers

[Money]

You can do both effectively. All you have to do is tax everyone who makes more than $1,000,000 an extra 5% in taxes and every corporation who makes more than $100 million in profit every year an extra 10%.

So you reduce military spending by 25%, you reduce welfare by 25%, you reduce government employees by 25% plus the minimal taxes the wealthy
need to pay and you fix the
problem.

Yeah just tax the people who run companies and do the hard work. The majority of people who make 100k+ are responsible for all of the stress and headaches that's involved in a business. They don't get paid that money to just show up to work and leave. They take home work. It's unfair to just make these people pay for the money Obama has spent trying to fix our economy by giving it to mosf people who are too sorry and lazy
to work. It's like when you're in elementary school and the majority of class gangs up on the select few that wear glasses or the like. Everyone joins in because they don't have glasses and they think it's funny. The majority of the population doesn't make 100k so they just say let's make wealthy pay all of our taxes. It's truly sorry.

[pavyracer]

Yeah just tax the people who run companies and do the hard work. The majority of people who make 100k+ are responsible for all of the stress and headaches that's involved in a business. They don't get paid that money to just show up to work and leave. They take home work. It's unfair to just make these people pay for the money Obama has spent trying to fix our economy by giving it to mosf people who are too sorry and lazy
to work. It's like when you're in elementary school and the majority of class gangs up on the select few that wear glasses or the like. Everyone joins in because they don't have glasses and they think it's funny. The majority of the population doesn't make 100k so they just say let's make wealthy pay all of our taxes. It's truly sorry.

Where did I say tax the people who make 100k or more?

Algebra 101: $1,000,000 is 10X more than 100k.

And I said tax the companies who make more than $100,000,000 profit per year (not market cap). That eliminates all small business.

When you go back to school and learn the difference between 100k and $1,000,000 come talk to me.

[Cap dat 4ss]

Just in case it hasn't already been mentioned

"How many times has the ceiling been raised? Since March 1962, the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times, according to the Congressional Research Service. Ten of those times have occurred since 2001.
Expect more of the same over the next decade. Barring major changes to spending and tax policies, "Congress would repeatedly face demands to raise the debt limit," CRS wrote."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/03/news/economy/debt_ceiling_faqs/index.htm

Lets not act like what just happened hasn't been a bi-annual event since 1962. The debt ceiling is raised all the fukking time.

[Money]

Ok sorry I misread what you wrote. But yeah Im in college so hopefully they'll teach me algebra soon. So let's tax people who really do all the work and make them pay for what Obama has done. And under 1% of population makes 1 million plus so I don't think that combined with your corporate tax is
going to solve the deficit. I don't know who you are or what your income is, and am not going to try to be an Internet tough guy or whatever, but from what you've presented i can somewhat confidently assume you don't make 1 million a year, probably not even 50k, and just want someone else to pay for the problems. I'd love to see your opinion if you were in a position that had a high salary with major responsibilities and duties and people were calling for your well earned money get taxed to pay for while the majority of population didn't face an increase. Get real man.

[PittsburghPlayer]

We are a terrorist nation. How else does anyone explain all the bombs we dropped in Iraq, after the gov`t lied to us that there were WMD`s or that 9-11 and Iraq were related. They were not. The war is/was over securing oil.
If we were citizens of Iraq, we would surely look at the U.S. as a terrorist nation.

[babyjesus]

lol i just heard that on CNN. got to love JOE

[pavyracer]

Ok sorry I misread what you wrote. But yeah Im in college so hopefully they'll teach me algebra soon. So let's tax people who really do all the work and make them pay for what Obama has done. And under 1% of population makes 1 million plus so I don't think that combined with your corporate tax is
going to solve the deficit. I don't know who you are or what your income is, and am not going to try to be an Internet tough guy or whatever, but from what you've presented i can somewhat confidently assume you don't make 1 million a year, probably not even 50k, and just want someone else to pay for the problems. I'd love to see your opinion if you were in a position that had a high salary with major responsibilities and duties and people were calling for your well earned money get taxed to pay for while the majority of population didn't face an increase. Get real man.

If you are in college then you don't make $1,000,000 either. A 5% additional tax to everyone who makes more than $1,000,000 a year is not going to drive them to bankruptcy. 5% is less than the sales tax in most states. I'm not proposing to tax then to death. A 5% is just a small token to help pay off the 15 trillion debt faster. And charging corporations who make $100,000,000 million profit per year an additional 10% in tax is not outrageous. It's just an indirect sales tax on the tax payers. Because the people who pay for those profits are the consumers who bought their products like iphones and gasoline.

There is only 1% of people who make more than $1,000,000 million per year and 0.1% of corporations that make more than $100,000,000 profit per year.

You need to get a dose of reality before you get out of college.

[King Mayan]

Ok sorry I misread what you wrote. But yeah Im in college so hopefully they'll teach me algebra soon. So let's tax people who really do all the work and make them pay for what Obama has done. And under 1% of population makes 1 million plus so I don't think that combined with your corporate tax is
going to solve the deficit. I don't know who you are or what your income is, and am not going to try to be an Internet tough guy or whatever, but from what you've presented i can somewhat confidently assume you don't make 1 million a year, probably not even 50k, and just want someone else to pay for the problems. I'd love to see your opinion if you were in a position that had a high salary with major responsibilities and duties and people were calling for your well earned money get taxed to pay for while the majority of population didn't face an increase. Get real man.

trust fund babies do all the work, while the guy making the products in a factory is a lazy bitch. Moron.

[Money]

If 5% isn't too much of a raise for people who make 1 million plus then how is that same 5% raiss not too much
to tax everyone? Simply raising tax rates for the wealthy isn't fixing the large problems we have. 5% won't drive people in the low to middle class to bankruptcy either. Everyone will just have to adjust to living with a smaller income. And I do not make 1 million plus or ever will but I still believe the 1% doesn't deserve to get higher taxes while the rest of the economy doesn't pay for the deficit. It may not be beneficial to me but I believe in what's right, not what's the best for myself.
And I need to Get a dose of reality? Because I believe not one particular party should be responsible for our countries problems? Obama Isnt the first president to run a large deficit, it's not all his problem, but why should one tiny group of Americans pay for something the whole country is responsible? Everyone needs to chip in, not just the wealthy community. I'm sure wealthy people can give up their luxury items like expensive cars and the rest of the country can give up their smaller luxury items like cigarettes and eating out.

[Money]

trust fund babies do all the work, while the guy making the products in a factory is a lazy bitch. Moron.

Trust fund babies? How many trust fund babies make up our population? There's always exceptions. Just like the people who cheat the system and collect unemployment checks and cost the govt $ while not providing anything. And no one said physical workers don't do any work. They do, but the people who are making 1 million plus don't get paid to sit in an office all day doing nothing. As hard as it is to believe. They are the ones making tough decisions and stressing their bodies 100% of the time. Mental work stays with you even when you're not working. Physical work you clock out and are done for the day. But I guess I'm just a moron.

[King Mayan]

Trust fund babies? How many trust fund babies make up our population? There's always exceptions. Just like the people who cheat the system and collect unemployment checks and cost the govt $ while not providing anything. And no one said physical workers don't do any work. They do, but the people who are making 1 million plus don't get paid to sit in an office all day doing nothing. As hard as it is to believe. They are the ones making tough decisions and stressing their bodies 100% of the time. Mental work stays with you even when you're not working. Physical work you clock out and are done for the day. But I guess I'm just a moron.

Yes. INVESTING into your company with your daddies money, is real hard work. The stress gets to them so hard, that they can't enjoy themselves in the a half-million dollar vacation they are in. While, the laborer enjoys his stress-free life with a steak in the weekend. Fukking laborer.

[ByeShea]

What perplexes me is how such a minority are able to wield such an influence

Call it the power of common sense, you twat.

Obama had to go sign that bill in secrecy, without cameras or fanfare because it's embarrassing that the United States has to go to the mats just to pay interest on money owed.

[Money]

Again, the amount of that 1% of the American population that are trust fund babies is probably close to .1. You're speaking of an exception to what I'm saying. And even then, they deserve to have to pay a high tax just because they happened to be the child of someone who earned a lot of money? I'm confident if you were im their position you would not have the same opinion as you do now. Look at both sides of the coin, not just one.

[King Mayan]

Again, the amount of that 1% of the American population that are trust fund babies is probably close to .1. You're speaking of an exception to what I'm saying. And even then, they deserve to have to pay a high tax just because they happened to be the child of someone who earned a lot of money? I'm confident if you were im their position you would not have the same opinion as you do now. Look at both sides of the coin, not just one.

Really %.1 you're making shit up. And I'm willing to pay more taxes now, I'm a American and I feel we are all in this together.

[tad0matic]

Really %.1 you're making shit up. And I'm willing to pay more taxes now, I'm a American and I feel we are all in this together.

actually 76.4% of all statistics are just made up.

[jw]

We need to eliminate the IRS and go to a straight consumption tax.

I have no problem with this ... as long as there are no exemptions ... you pay the %'ge of what you spend on absolutely everything you buy. Diapers, tv's, food, yachts, adopted children from Africa ... everything.

[Money]

Consumption tax, although the most equal, doesn't exactly work. It encourages consumers to save rather than spend. Income tax needs to be used, but it needs to be equal. Simply saying the top 1% needs to pay is just downright wrong. The majority of America voted Obama, and our past presidents, into office, and the majority of America needs to pay financial for the debt our country has incurred. Just my thoughts

[jw]

It encourages consumers to save rather than spend.

That's a bad thing ?

The bigger problem of course will be that after congress is done with it .. the law will be full of "exemptions" to "help" lower income families .. and exemptions for any group with a lobbyist (airlines, insurance companies, etc etc) and we will be right back where we are now.

[rsnnh12]

I have no problem with this ... as long as there are no exemptions ... you pay the %'ge of what you spend on absolutely everything you buy. Diapers, tv's, food, yachts, adopted children from Africa ... everything.

Why food?

I agree with the rest btw, just think food should be spared

[jw]

Why food?

I agree with the rest btw, just think food should be spared

Because if you make one exemption .. you open yourself to more ... first it will be food, then healthcare costs, then the airline industry lobbyists will weight in and flights will be exempt, then churches will become exempt , then anyone earning less than x will be able to claim back at the end of the year, then small business owners will be exempt ... then we will be right back where we started.

[rsnnh12]

Because if you make one exemption .. you open yourself to more ... first it will be food, then healthcare costs, then the airline industry lobbyists will weight in and flights will be exempt, then churches will become exempt , then anyone earning less than x will be able to claim back at the end of the year, then small business owners will be exempt ... then we will be right back where we started.

Fair enough. I think I'm being too idealistic with the 'no taxing food' thing. Judging by the decisions our society has made over the last 100 years, your scenario is more likely

[pavyracer]

They have consumption tax (VAT) in Europe and it's on everything food included. This is on top of income tax. But they don't have sales tax like here in the US.

The only way to reduce the 15 trillion dollar debt is through a combination of drastic spending and strategic tax increases to the ones who can afford to pay for it. If you do one without the other you will be back to square one in 10 years.

[Money]

That's a bad thing ?

The bigger problem of course will be that after congress is done with it .. the law will be full of "exemptions" to "help" lower income families .. and exemptions for any group with a lobbyist (airlines, insurance companies, etc etc) and we will be right back where we are now.

Our economy, and GDP, are reliant on consumer spending. If there is a consumption tax then the government will not take in enough revenue because consumers will save their money more frequently now. Take back in the 90s when old Bush tried to implement the luxury tax. All it did was discourage wealthy people from buying lavish boats and cars and put middle and low class people out of work.

[jw]

Our economy, and GDP, are reliant on consumer spending.

... and there is your problem. Pushing people to spend more than they can afford to spend is how we got where we are right now ... if people are in debt .. they can't save - if they don't save .. they are more likely to end up on welfare and government assistance ... if they end up on government assistance ... it costs the government more money - so they shout and scream that people need to spend more ...


Sure spending is fine ... but there has to be a balance ... encouraging saving now will result in lower government spending later.

[pavyracer]

... and there is your problem. Pushing people to spend more than they can afford to spend is how we got where we are right now ...

Exactly..most consumers (ages 18-45) spend on credit and not cash and this is what got us in this mess of 15 trillion dollars debt. 40-50 years ago this was never a problem. People bought vehicles with cash, appliances with cash, put 20-30% down payment for houses and only went on vacation when they have saved the cash. Now these people rack up CC debt and then they spend the rest of their lives paying interest.

[Money]

I'm not stating any opinions on people spending too much money or vice versa. But simply taxing people on consumption will not yield enough revenue. We need to have income tax. Income tax is taken out no matter what. It doesn't influence someone into saving or spending. Consumption tax and no income tax, encourages people to save. There needs to be a middle ground and income tax provides that.

[Money]

Exactly..most consumers (ages 18-45) spend on credit and not cash and this is what got us in this mess of 15 trillion dollars debt. 40-50 years ago this was never a problem. People bought vehicles with cash, appliances with cash, put 20-30% down payment for houses and only went on vacation when they
have saved the cash. Now these people rack up CC debt and then they spend
the rest of their lives paying
interest.

I don't understand how this applies to the govt and consumption tax. The government cannot control how people spend their money. Credit wasn't as easy to access back in those days either. The govt has already made it harder for 21 and unders to get ************. No one is pushing for anyone to spend more than they can and no one is saying save more than you can. Our economy works the best when were in the middle

[jw]

taxing people on consumption will not yield enough revenue.

It depends how much you tax them.

[pavyracer]

I don't understand how this applies to the govt and consumption tax. The government cannot control how people spend their money. Credit wasn't as easy to access back in those days either. The govt has already made it harder for 21 and unders to get ************. No one is pushing for anyone to spend more than they can and no one is saying save more than you can. Our economy works the best when were in the middle

The same banks who offer credit and charge 30% interest needed a bailout from the government because they offered mortgages to people who couldn't afford it. Why does the government which is funded by the taxpayers money bail out the banks who pray on consumers?

[PittsburghPlayer]

The same banks who offer credit and charge 30% interest needed a bailout from the government because they offered mortgages to people who couldn't afford it. Why does the government which is funded by the taxpayers money bail out the banks who pray on consumers?

Because we are collectively a lazy nation of people that will not get off of our asses to do something until it is too late. Which is probably only a day or two away! Nice ride while it lasted!!
Getting to the point where I am going to start puffing the "killer green" again so that maybe this shit bothers me less.

[DwightShrute]

Tea Party

• Eliminate Excessive Taxes
• Eliminate the National Debt
• Eliminate Deficit Spending
• Protect Free Markets
• Abide by the Constitution of the United States
• Promote Civic Responsibility
• Reduce the Overall Size of Government

How horrible huh?

[King Mayan]

Tea Party

• Eliminate Excessive Taxes
• Eliminate the National Debt
• Eliminate Deficit Spending
• Protect Free Markets
• Abide by the Constitution of the United States
• Promote Civic Responsibility
• Reduce the Overall Size of Government

How horrible huh?

Protect the free market?? why didn't they want to get rid of the subsidies and tax loopholes?? Selfish hypocrites more like it.

[DwightShrute]

Protect the free market?? why didn't they want to get rid of the subsidies and tax loopholes?? Selfish hypocrites more like it.

4. Protect Free Markets - America’s free enterprise system allows businesses to thrive as they compete in the open marketplace and strive toward ever better services and products. Allowing free markets to prosper unfettered by government interference is what propelled this country to greatness with an enduring belief in the industriousness and innovations of the populace.

“That some achieve great success, is proof to all that others can achieve it as well.” --Abraham Lincoln

“You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man’s initiative and independence.” --Abraham Lincoln

“The government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” --Ronald Reagan

http://www.teaparty-platform.com/