GOP Senators filibuster the Buffett Rule

[Ausm]

I'm not surprised since they filibuster everything but it really shows you where they stand.

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/16/11229733-senate-rejects-buffett-rule?lite

 

[Anarchist420]

It wouldn't give the Federal government more than $20Bn extra in revenue for this fiscal year.

I'm not surprised since they filibuster everything but it really shows you where they stand.

 

[theeedude]

$20B is nothing to sneeze at.
I am fine with just letting Bush tax cuts finally expire. No need to pass anything.

 

[Anarchist420]

$20B is nothing to sneeze at

L O L. $20Bn is less than 2% of FY2012's deficit.

 

[Ausm]

It wouldn't give the Federal government more than $20Bn extra in revenue for this fiscal year.

It's a start and when we couple this with the Bush tax cuts expiring we will start getting our Fiscal house in order. That's if we don't have ten more Wars down the road.

 

[Anarchist420]

It's a start and when we couple this with the Bush tax cuts expiring we will start getting our Fiscal house in order.

So you want taxes on the middle class to go up too?

Restoring the Clinton tax rates against the wealthy would only bring in $50Bn this fiscal year. Again, less than 5% of the deficit.

 

[Ausm]

So you want taxes on the middle class to go up?

Why not?

 

[spacejamz]

WTF??? all of this smoke and mirrors crap for $46.7B over the next 10 years??

The bill would raise $46.7 billion over the next ten years, according to the nonpartisan staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, so it would in itself do little to reduce the long-term mismatch between revenues and spending.

 

[Jhhnn]

It wouldn't give the Federal government more than $20Bn extra in revenue for this fiscal year.

The latest in concern trolling- when somebody proposes a move in the right direction, pooh-pooh it, offer that we should do nothing instead.

 

[Anarchist420]

Why not?

because taxation is institutionalized theft!

 

[Jhhnn]

So you want taxes on the middle class to go up too?

Restoring the Clinton tax rates against the wealthy would only bring in $50Bn this fiscal year. Again, less than 5% of the deficit.

What if we restored pre-Reagan tax rates on the Wealthy?

 

[Ausm]

WTF??? all of this smoke and mirrors crap for $46.7B over the next 10 years??

The bill would raise $46.7 billion over the next ten years, according to the nonpartisan staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, so it would in itself do little to reduce the long-term mismatch between revenues and spending.

What's your solution then? Going with the Ryan/Romney plan that gives the richest even more tax cuts while fucking over the people who could ill afford it will blowing an even huger hole in the deficit?

 

[Anarchist420]

offer that we should do nothing instead.

Um... no, damn it. I've said for a long time that the problem is too much spending and too much revenue.

 

[Ausm]

because taxation is institutionalized theft!

Then we have been robbed for over 200 years.

 

[Anarchist420]

What if we restored pre-Reagan tax rates on the Wealthy?

Once again, that wouldn't nick a hole in the deficit.

What's your solution then? Going with the Ryan/Romney plan that gives the Richest even more tax cuts while fucking over the people who could ill afford it will blowing an even huger hole in the deficit?

You know damn well Dr. Paul's Restore America Now plan is what I support

 

[Jhhnn]

because taxation is institutionalized theft!

Libertopian Sloganeering. How quaint. How utterly delusional. How completely trollish of you.

 

[Anarchist420]

Then we have been robbed for over 200 years.

That doesn't make it right.

 

[Paul98]

Of course they do, if they did anything other than this it would have been a huge surprise. Everyone already knows what these people stand for.

 

[Ausm]

Once again, that wouldn't nick a hole in the deficit.

Going from a tax rate of 20% to 60% would be no difference? LMAO

Show me your numbers!

 

[Ausm]

Does that make it right?

Did I say it did? But how do you expect this country to run without taxes? Please illustrate how it could be done!

 

[theeedude]

We need to go to Clinton level tax rates across the board, income, cap gains, dividends, and estate tax.

 

[Phokus]

because taxation is institutionalized theft!

You know, if every single year, someone holds you up and steals your wallet, you'd think you would move to some place where that doesn't happen ... every single year.

I find it odd that libertarians would voluntarily have their hard earned cash stolen rather than moving to, say, the libertarian paradise of Somalia.

 

[glenn1]

I'm not surprised since they filibuster everything but it really shows you where they stand.

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/16/11229733-senate-rejects-buffett-rule?lite

True, but it also doesn't matter much since it wouldn't have gone anywhere in the GOP-led House where filibuster rules don't apply anyway. Democrats get what pretty much what they expected out of the result in the Senate, which is a campaign issue for them to run on come Fall. Whether that helps them much is up for debate; personally I doubt it will move the needle much since in polls people support the idea of higher taxes for the rich but it's not a high-intensity issue for anyone but the most rabid partisans.

 

[Anarchist420]

Going from a tax rate of 20% to 60% would be no difference? LMAO Show me your numbers!

It wouldn't fill in more than 5% of the deficit. No one in their right mind would just give 60% of their income to the federal government if they could afford not to.

 

[Anarchist420]

the libertarian paradise of Somalia.

Somalia is not libertarian and it is not a paradise.