• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

President to propose tax increases <shocker!>

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
her209 said:
"We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem."
- Republican talking point

We do have a revenue problem thanks to the recession.
090803-tax-revenue-bcol-3p.grid-6x2.jpg
Click to expand...

But remember, according to Republicans, if you cut taxes on the rich then they put that money back into the economy. Which is why we were never in a recession because of the Bush tax cuts. And also why when we extended the Bush tax cuts we completely ended the down economy. I see how everything magically got fixed, don't you?
 
Obama is in the same position Bush Sr. was.

Is it any wonder why our country is in the sad shape it is? When they talk about cutting any program, mobs of people protest and demand to keep it. When they talk about raising taxes, mobs of people protest against it.

Seriously people.... WHAT THE FUCK IS THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSED TO DO? IS ANYONE WILLING TO LET THEIR COMFY LITTLE LIVES BE AFFECTED SO WE CAN GET THIS DEFICIT UNDER CONTR.... oohh... American Idol reruns.....
 
Common Courtesy said:
I have no problem increasing taxes on a one for one real rate.

Every new tax $ that everyone pays MUST be matched by an offset of $ in spending decrease. No smoke or mirors in terms of cuts like Obama succeeded with this last round.

We have (in round numbers) 300Millioin people in the country.
A forced tax of $10/head would raise $3B - a token, but an example
At the same time actually cutback $3B from the government spending.

At this point we are ahead $6B with little pain in the year.

Now take that $10/head and impose it every month.
Do the same with the spending and we have gone to $60B - again a small drop, but the amount of tax is less than most people waste in a week.

Once everyone is starting to realize that handouts do not come free; the loopholes and graduated taxes can be addressed.
Click to expand...



Were you you calling for 1 to 1 spending cuts for every dollar of the Bush tax cuts when they were implemented ? I doubt it

Seems like you have some real backwards logic. It's OK to cut taxes without cutting spending, but if you raise taxes you must cut spending? 😕


Anyone in the country earning above median income is living at the highest standard of anybody on the planet and paying less &#37; in taxes than the majority of industrialized countrys. But the greedy and selfish always want more, more and wants to pay less and less. Hell I think we should fund the government like rich country clubs do, by assessing the taxpayers at the end of the year. Do away with all income hiding loopholes, then just divy up what the government spent during the year and send everybody the bill at the end of the year based on their income 🙂

The only other alternative is to force balance the budget. Make it where you can't raise spending for any reason including military(Iraq, Afganistan) without raising tax revenue, and if tax revenues drop automatic spending cuts kick in at certain levels, and conversly you can't reduce taxes without matching spending cuts which must be implemented before the tax cuts can take effect.
 
Last edited:
Who wants to bet he eliminates mortgage deduction and charitable contributions? Remember, in his eyes that's "revenue" that they're missing out on.
 
spidey07 said:
I paid into it, that's MY money and you can't say I can't have it, thief. If you want to means test, let me opt out and I'll agree.
Click to expand...

lol

"You leaches get off the government dime! I'm sick of paying your way!"

"Let's cut Social Security."

"NO! That's MY money!"

The hypocrisy is so glaring I have to wear shades.
 
spidey07 said:
I paid into it, that's MY money and you can't say I can't have it, thief. If you want to means test, let me opt out and I'll agree.
Click to expand...

Think of it as doing your fair share to pay for imperialism and security..


How about we call it the freedom tax! Hell it would probably not even pay for the department of fatherland security...
 
tax rates are unsustainably low at this point anyway.

Cuts are needed to pretty much all of the bloated programs (the big 4), but taxes need to rise and S.S. needs to be fixed.
 
her209 said:
"We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem."
- Republican talking point

We do have a revenue problem thanks to the recession.
090803-tax-revenue-bcol-3p.grid-6x2.jpg
Click to expand...

We have less revenue thanks to the recession but its no where close to what you need to pay for what we are spending.

The problem:

usgs_line.php


usgs_line.php


Increase taxes on the rich if you want, its not gonna be enough.
So either you tax the middle class or cut spending dramatically.

We have a spending problem, I don't see how anyone can seriously sit there and deny that with a straight face.
 
Last edited:
child of wonder said:
lol

"You leaches get off the government dime! I'm sick of paying your way!"

"Let's cut Social Security."

"NO! That's MY money!"

The hypocrisy is so glaring I have to wear shades.
Click to expand...

What hypocrisy? That's not government money that I'm asking for, it's money that I paid into the fund. My money.
 
her209 said:
"We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem."
- Republican talking point

We do have a revenue problem thanks to the recession.
090803-tax-revenue-bcol-3p.grid-6x2.jpg
Click to expand...

This idiotic graph again? You really fail at understanding what the graph is telling you. It shows percentage changes in tax receipts. That doesn't tell you anything about whether the problems we face are because of spending or receipts. Here's a hint for ya: even before the recession the amount we spent was massively higher than the amount we brought in. Spending is the problem.
 
Anyone who thinks responsible tax increases are not required as part of the fix are either in denial or in super-pander mode.
 
her209 said:
That's like asking for money you paid to the insurance company back. Because that's what Social Security is.
Click to expand...

not really?

althought my life insurance pays me my $$ back in 28 years now, and we split the interest, if I don't die. if I do die, of course, it pays out way bigger :biggrin:
 
spidey, sorry to say, that SS money is not yours.
The government has no responsibility or obligation to pay you anything.

I live my life assuming I will never get anything from the government.
Don't ever trust the government with your money.
 
PokerGuy said:
No, social security is not an insurance policy. Fail.
Click to expand...

Its also not a retirement fund, it is a TAX! And if you think its your money you are FAIL. SS was intended to be a safety net program to garantee a minimum standard of living for the elderly.

I am also for means testing SS, I think the cutoff levels should be fairly high like annual income of $200k
 
manimal said:
What ever happened with "Ask not what you can do...."


Shared sacrifice is shared..

The fix spending first mantra is disingenuous since any way you slice it the deficit needs to be attacked from both sides of the issue..
Click to expand...

so, by your logic, we need to end EIC and credits that give money to low income earners, raise rates across the board and start taxing the 50%+ of people who pay nothing into the system, yet use most of the services.


I can buy into that, along with major cuts.
 
GuitarDaddy said:
Its also not a retirement fund, it is a TAX! And if you think its your money you are FAIL. SS was intended to be a safety net program to garantee a minimum standard of living for the elderly.

I am also for means testing SS, I think the cutoff levels should be fairly high like annual income of $200k
Click to expand...

F That. Make it private or get rid of it. I should be paying for someone else's retirement.
 
jonks said:
Anyone who thinks responsible tax increases are not required as part of the fix are either in denial or in super-pander mode.
Click to expand...

Actually, I could see the argument that taxes need to be temporarily jacked to help get us to a point where we could straighten things out. There is no way we need to just "increase taxes" permanently. Tax levels are too high as they are. Tax more, spend less, then reduce taxes and spend less etc until you run a surplus.
 
CPA said:
so, by your logic, we need to end EIC and credits that give money to low income earners, raise rates across the board and start taxing the 50%+ of people who pay nothing into the system, yet use most of the services.


I can buy into that, along with major cuts.
Click to expand...

Yep. People that get EIC, pay no federal income tax, etc need to pay their fair share.
 
Schadenfroh said:
Good, everyone from top to bottom need to pay for the services from the government that they demand.
Click to expand...

I don't ask anything from my federal government except what is expressly noted in the Constitution. They should regulate foreign affairs and interstate affairs. And that's all.

I don't want all these ridiculous federal programs that do absolutely nothing for me and overlap with umpteen thousand state and local agencies.

Does that mean I don't need to pay any taxes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top