Mr. T Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Obama's Phony War on the Rich Ever since the First Couple entered the White House, their social life has swirled around the very rich. Hollywood actors, pop star singers, Wall Street hedge fund managers, billionaire investors — these are the fabled "top 1 percent" in terms of income and wealth. The Obamas invite them to White House dinners. They vacation with them on Martha’s Vineyard. They party with them. They sup with them at $35,000-a-plate fundraisers. (Have these affairs ever included an auto worker? A mine worker? How about someone who is unemployed and looking for a job? What about someone who has lost his home? As far as I can tell, the bottom 99 percent never seems to make the cut.) Here is what we are being asked to believe. During his three years in office, the president has come to realize that all of the people he plays golf with, has dinner with and collects millions of dollars from have too much. All of the people he never sees, never talks to and never socializes with have too little. So the president’s campaign-for-re-election theme will be: take from his friends and give to all those strangers. Is any of this believable? Continued here. So much for him trying to make everyone believe that he is a uniter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 T, if I may, how much do you make in a year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 T, if I may, how much do you make in a year? I am self employed and operate under a LLC, do you want to know what I have earned or what my 1040 states? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Is this like when Fox News thought he was spending $300,000 on a vacation in India? I'd also like to see numbers on past presidents, adjusted for inflation and other costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Heck translation: "dammit, I have to change the subject away from this one, too, and FAST" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Mitt Romney paid a 13.9% rate in 2010. This is probably less than any of us. I know it's less than me. But wait, the rich are taxed soooooooooooo highly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 But his taxes on what he earned.... what he earned was income that was taxed already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think you're trying to say that the money he originally invested from his income was taxed. That may be true, but obviously, his fortune has grown far beyond anything he's actually "earned." Who's to say what rate he paid on the amount that was originally earned or what that amount was. In addition, his earnings are gains, mostly new money from dividends and interest. 13.9% is inexcusable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Dude's good with money, no doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Source It will be announced in tonight in Obama's Statist of the Union address. In other news of government skulduggery: Spirit Airlines sent this to their customers (hat tip Sean): WARNING: New government regulations require us to HIDE taxes in your fares. This is not consumer-friendly or in your best interest. It's wrong and you shouldn't stand for it. Starting January 24, 2012, fares are distorted. Why? Thanks to the U.S. Department of Transportation's latest fare rules, Spirit must now HIDE the government's taxes and fees in your fares. If the government can hide taxes in your airfares, then they can carry out their hidden agenda and quietly increase their taxes. (Yes, such talks are already underway.) And if they can do it to the airline industry, what's next? As the transparency leader and most consumer-friendly airline, Spirit DOES NOT support this new USDOT mandate. We believe the better form of transparency is to break out costs so customers know exactly what they're buying. What can you do to help stop this injustice? Join us in keeping government taxes and fees low and transparent by contacting your elected officials. And a word from Ayn Rand: Businessmen vs. Bureaucrats A businessman’s success depends on his intelligence, his knowledge, his productive ability, his economic judgment—and on the voluntary agreement of all those he deals with: his customers, his suppliers, his employees, his creditors or investors. A bureaucrat’s success depends on his political pull. A businessman cannot force you to buy his product; if he makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences; if he fails, he takes the loss. A bureaucrat forces you to obey his decisions, whether you agree with him or not—and the more advanced the stage of a country’s statism, the wider and more discretionary the powers wielded by a bureaucrat. If he makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences; if he fails, he passes the loss on to you, in the form of heavier taxes. “From My ‘Future File,’” The Ayn Rand Letter, III, 26, 5 A businessman cannot force you to work for him or to accept the wages he offers; you are free to seek employment elsewhere and to accept a better offer, if you can find it. (Remember, in this context, that jobs do not exist “in nature,” that they do not grow on trees, that someone has to create the job you need, and that that someone, the businessman, will go out of business if he pays you more than the market permits him to pay you.) A bureaucrat can force you to work for him, when he achieves the totalitarian power he seeks; he can force you to accept any payment he offers—or none, as witness the forced labor camps in the countries of full statism. The businessman’s tool is values; the bureaucrat’s tool is fear. “America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business,” Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, 48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Did anyone watch the whole damn pack of lies Obama spewed out? I was watching while playing poker on fb, turned the shit off when he went into his diatribe of wealthiest 2% and whoever the fook they are and how they have it so easy... and should have to pay pay pay!!!! So we had rented the "The Ides of March" movie and I'm not sure which is worse; the movie or Obama's class warfare. But I will say that while playing poker on facebook the message board was everyone ragging on how Obama is a freaking liar and that his speech is so hypocritical. Now these comment were coming from everywhere across the net. It was quite entertaining to watch read and listen to everyone kick Obama's ass to the curb. I don't believe that even Jimmy Carter ever received such a ass kicking on any message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 It was just demonstrated that many of the wealthiest 2% of Americans pay less of a percentage than you do. Of course that doesn't bother you, father Murdock denounced increasing taxes on the rich on his show FOX news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 The 2% IllusionEven the most basic inspection of the IRS income tax statistics shows that raising taxes on the salaries, dividends and capital gains of those making more than $250,000 can't possibly raise enough revenue to fund Mr. Obama's new spending ambitions. Consider the IRS data for 2006, the most recent year that such tax data are available and a good year for the economy and "the wealthiest 2%." Roughly 3.8 million filers had adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 in 2006. (That's about 7% of all returns; the data aren't broken down at the $250,000 point.) These people paid about $522 billion in income taxes, or roughly 62% of all federal individual income receipts. The richest 1% -- about 1.65 million filers making above $388,806 -- paid some $408 billion, or 39.9% of all income tax revenues, while earning about 22% of all reported U.S. income. Note that federal income taxes are already "progressive" with a 35% top marginal rate, and that Mr. Obama is (so far) proposing to raise it only to 39.6%, plus another two percentage points in hidden deduction phase-outs. He'd also raise capital gains and dividend rates, but those both yield far less revenue than the income tax. These combined increases won't come close to raising the hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue that Mr. Obama is going to need. WSJ Source So this will include several small business owners. This will be less money for them to be able to compete let alone hire new employees. And we have not figured in the cost of inflation. Maybe we should reach out and grab a government job and we wont have to take any of the risks and reap all of the rewards from all of the rest of the working stiffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 It was just demonstrated that many of the wealthiest 2% of Americans pay less of a percentage than you do. Of course that doesn't bother you, father Murdock denounced increasing taxes on the rich on his show FOX news. And they still pay the lion's share of american tax revenue. And nearly half of americans don't pay any. Personally I'd like to see investing made as attractive as possible. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 So this will include several small business owners. This will be less money for them to be able to compete let alone hire new employees. And we have not figured in the cost of inflation. Maybe we should reach out and grab a government job and we wont have to take any of the risks and reap all of the rewards from all of the rest of the working stiffs. Bull. A few percentage points increase in taxes will NOT discourage businesses profitable enough to be paying such an increase from hiring. If they need employees, they will hire them. Their profits depend on providing their product and they need employees to provide it. Decreasing taxes on businesses does not encourage them to hire anyone either. No one hires a plumber to fix pipes that aren't broken because it was a few bucks cheaper than it was last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 And they still pay the lion's share of american tax revenue. WSS That's fitting, because THEY MAKE AND HOLD the lion's share of America's wealth. So they should have their cake and eat it to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 you can confiscate all of the money from all of the rich and build bridges and highways and in the end you will still have FAILED. Socialism has been proven to to FAIL time and time again, soon you will run out of other people's money. many of them pay less of a percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 That's fitting, because THEY MAKE AND HOLD the lion's share of America's wealth. So they should have their cake and eat it to? I'm saying it's bad for the nation when so many get a free ride. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Bull. A few percentage points increase in taxes will NOT discourage businesses profitable enough to be paying such an increase from hiring. If they need employees, they will hire them. Their profits depend on providing their product and they need employees to provide it. Decreasing taxes on businesses does not encourage them to hire anyone either. No one hires a plumber to fix pipes that aren't broken because it was a few bucks cheaper than it was last year. No you dont. But you might certainly put of needed repairs because that union plumber wants too much money. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Obamao's "fair share" is fake appeal to the middle. If he wanted FAIR SHARE, he would endorse a flat tax. But he never will - he'd lose his dependent, class warfare base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I'm saying it's bad for the nation when so many get a free ride. WSS I agree. No one should get back more than they pay in, but it happens with EIC. People should pay at least $100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 No you dont. But you might certainly put of needed repairs because that union plumber wants too much money. WSS That's a good point, but the tax burden cannot be placed primarily on the middle class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 That's a good point, but the tax burden cannot be placed primarily on the middle class. But nobody suggested that All I've suggested is making sure that everybody pays something. The rich will always pay much much more than anyone else or any other group. That's why I support the public mandate portion of obama care. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Everyone does pay something. Your "free ride" obsession isn't even true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Everyone does pay something. Your "free ride" obsession isn't even true. ******************* baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Everyone does pay something. Your "free ride" obsession isn't even true. Everybody pays federal income tax? They do? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Romney bitches about the welfare state, when he was the lead lobbyist in the tax laws that benefit him greatly. What's the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Romney bitches about the welfare state, when he was the lead lobbyist in the tax laws that benefit him greatly. What's the difference? He does? He did? When was that? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 He does? He did? When was that? WSS Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Better yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.