# Obama Pushing for Tax Hike on Top Earners: If You Make \$250K+ a Year, Should You Have to Pay More?

Chris D 2012/07/09 16:00:00
 Yes No It depends
You!
Politicians love to raise taxes -- and it's not just the Democrats! Do you think that those who are successful and achieve greater income should have to pay a disproportionally greater share of the tax burden?

FOXNEWS.COM reports:
President Obama, amid charges of waging class warfare, is expected to push Monday for a tax hike on families earning more than \$250,000 -- and an extension of the Bush-era tax rates for families making less than that.

## More polls by Chris D

### Sort By Most Raves Least Raves Oldest Newest text size Opinions

• Reichstolz Epistem... 2012/07/12 04:06:14
The higher the success the higher the percentage correct? Let us use you model in something tangible to the dullard class.

Your child achieves a 100% in a class. Since they have been successful and others haven't it is only fair that their effort be distributed to the rest who haven't done so well. Because they are only successful because the rest of the class is there taking up space.

So according to your Fairness Model
The child who achieves 100% must distribute 35% back to the class.
The child who achieved 90% must distribute 28% back to the class
The child who achieved 80% must distribute 25% back to the class
The child who achieved 70% must contribute 2% back to the class.
Anyone who didn't achieve 60% receives all the points the others contributed.

Now for the question. Would you tell your child that is not punishment for success?
That is our current tax system, by the way.

Equal percentages? OK let us pick a percentage.
The person earning \$1,000,000 pays \$180,000
The person earning \$24,000 pays \$4,320
The current annual spending in the US is 3.4 trillion
305 million people in the US =\$111,475 per person to cover the spending annually.
Only 63% of the population is currently participating in the labor force that equals 192,150,000 people working
3.4 trillion in s...

The higher the success the higher the percentage correct? Let us use you model in something tangible to the dullard class.

Your child achieves a 100% in a class. Since they have been successful and others haven't it is only fair that their effort be distributed to the rest who haven't done so well. Because they are only successful because the rest of the class is there taking up space.

So according to your Fairness Model
The child who achieves 100% must distribute 35% back to the class.
The child who achieved 90% must distribute 28% back to the class
The child who achieved 80% must distribute 25% back to the class
The child who achieved 70% must contribute 2% back to the class.
Anyone who didn't achieve 60% receives all the points the others contributed.

Now for the question. Would you tell your child that is not punishment for success?
That is our current tax system, by the way.

Equal percentages? OK let us pick a percentage.
The person earning \$1,000,000 pays \$180,000
The person earning \$24,000 pays \$4,320
The current annual spending in the US is 3.4 trillion
305 million people in the US =\$111,475 per person to cover the spending annually.
Only 63% of the population is currently participating in the labor force that equals 192,150,000 people working
3.4 trillion in spending.= \$176,945 per working person just to pay for what the government is currently spending annually.
As you can see the person making \$1,000,000 is covering his share.
If you want to further compound that consider that 47.3% of those working in this nation do not pay federal income taxes. Here is a little test for you(that I made my 12 year old calculate for her math project)
Tell me how many years a person making \$40,000 would have to work just to cover their percentage of the annual burden of government? Then do it for every income bracket. You will find it is only the rich who are paying their share of the burden of government every year.

The point being you can tax everyone at 100% every year and without stopping the spending it will not matter.

Regarding the middle class, yes, for the majority, they are unproductive. They are only relevant to the amount of debt they carry. As we have seen the majority does not possess the skills to earn a living without some assistance. The only thing separating the middle class from the poor is a credit card, given to them by someone willing to take advantage of their fiscal stupidity.
(more)
• Epistem... Reichstolz 2012/07/12 18:04:56
You're being ridiculous now.

I'm saying that the upper class should pay AT LEAST the same percentage as the middle class. Currently, they pay LESS by percentage.

Applying tax theory to child's grades is pointless. The analogy fails.

"Regarding the middle class, yes, for the majority, they are unproductive. They are only relevant to the amount of debt they carry. As we have seen the majority does not possess the skills to earn a living without some assistance. The only thing separating the middle class from the poor is a credit card, given to them by someone willing to take advantage of their fiscal stupidity." Unless you are a comfortable millionaire, you are insulting yourself (and, most of the people on this site).
• Reichstolz Epistem... 2012/07/13 02:11:15 (edited)
The middle class doesn't pay anything comparative to what they utilize.
The analogy is accurate it is just that most people in the dullard class do not realize what our tax system is.

I am wealthier than Mitt. I breezed through the middle class in my twenties with the purchase of my second business.

I will share with you since I just made my second quarter IRS payment, \$236,831, that equates to about 16.2% of my personal income for the quarter. My businesses just paid \$697,324 for the same quarter and that is about 35.4% of net.

The federal government will receive no more than that in any given quarter. If capital gains and income taxes are raised this year or next I will close all of my businesses and have the 300 employees of mine call Obama and ask him to find them work. There are plenty of nations abroad that will welcome my risk tolerance and will not expect to confiscate one third of my profit.

Until the middle farce contributes even a small percentage of the spending they vote for, I will continue to make sure the government cannot confiscate any more wealth than I am comfortable letting them.
• Epistem... Reichstolz 2012/07/13 17:17:24
Though Obama would classify me as "wealthy" since I do make more than \$250,000, however I think by my lifestyle I'm still considered middle class. I work for big oil, 9 to 5 sort of job, I recently finished paying off my student loan debt and I still owe on my mortgage. I'm doing well, but I see the effect that a tough economy has on my neighbors.

People facing foreclosure, people laid off and living just above their means having cars repossessed and creditors hounding them. I feel for these people -- these families. I think that people like you and me CAN and SHOULD pay a greater percentage than what we currently do. I think we need to end Bush era tax breaks to the wealthy and look out for the middle class family.

This nation is NOTHING without the working middle class and the health of our economy depends on a thriving middle class. If you want to see your business succeed for years, you must also be concerned with this economy.

You must also recognize that without the working middle class, this nation as a whole fails.
• Reichstolz Epistem... 2012/07/13 23:09:57 (edited)
Everything that is tough facing anyone, is self inflicted. Personal responsibility would dictate that if you have to borrow money to do something you don't NEED it. I think you do not understand capitalism or personal responsibility.

You are correct the current tax rates should be ended, they should be lowered to 18% across the board. The federal budget should be cut to where that 18% is sufficient to pay down the national debt. So that would equal roughly a 1 Trillion dollar annual budget. But, because the nation is fiscally stupid, they will probably agree with you.

The working middle class is nothing to worry about, keeping those with a hunger to take on risk, doing so in this nation, will do more for the dullard class than anything government can make them dependent on.

Without a working debtor class this nation achieves real growth and real prosperity.
• Christopher Kirchen 2012/07/10 13:17:49
No
Such people are the backbone of our economics
• Super_Doodles 2012/07/10 13:07:43
No
I think the government needs to stop spending money that doesn't belong to them!
• WGN 2012/07/10 13:05:25
Yes
If one really knows the economic history of this country, they would know that the greatest growth in real GDP happens when the top tax is 75% or more. Don't believe me? Look it up.
Low taxes for the wealthy leads to sustained prosperity is just another myth perpetuated by the Reagan conservatives for their own gain.
• Lady Wh... WGN 2012/07/10 13:31:57
Well said
• Bob S Lady Wh... 2012/07/10 14:36:22
Why is it well said. Are you paying your fair share.
• WGN Bob S 2012/07/10 16:31:19
It was well said because it is the truth. Check out the chart below.
• Bob S WGN 2012/07/10 18:10:32
True perhaps but it won't pay off any debt as Obama spends more each day.
• boneman1 WGN 2012/07/10 13:52:17
Where did you get your information? During Reagan's term in office he lowered the tax rate from 70% to 28%. The share of income taxes paid from the top 1% grew from 18% in 1981 to 27% in 1989. The top 10% of earners in this country now pay 70% of all income taxes collected. The bottom 50% pay ZERO. How much do the successful in this country have to pay before you on the left believe they've given their fair share?
• WGN boneman1 2012/07/10 16:27:23 (edited)
The graph is quit accurate.

The numbers at the bottom are the tax rate, so if you look at Reagan's numbers in the 30% range on the left, you will see that real GDP growth was no where near as much as it was when the top tax was highest. The biggest growth occurs when the top tax is 75% or more.
Sorry to burst your conservative bubble, but Reagan's real growth was a one hit wonder, and amounted to next to nothing in LONG TERM growth. The long term effects of outsourcing, tax cuts, NAFTA, and union busting is directly connected to the recession we have now.

You fail to look at the long term effects of conservative economics, and have blinders on when faced with the truth that tax cuts have done nothing for the MAJORITY of the american people.
• boneman1 WGN 2012/07/10 19:53:13
Your chart doesn't mention whether or not tax collections increased or decreased when the rates were raised. Under Reagan when he decreased the rates the percentage of taxes paid by the top 1% went from 18% to 27%. My guess is that if you check things out you'll probably find that when rates were increased the amount paid by the wealthy probably didn't change much and may have gone down because they are able to move their money to areas not affected by increases in the income tax rates.
• WGN boneman1 2012/07/11 00:10:42
I am sorry that you do not understand economics. just what do you think happens when the gross domestic product increases? More money is collected on all fronts as prosperity gives people and business more money. state taxes on goods goes up, wages go up, and money received by the government goes up.
reagan also had the revenues go down near the end of his term as the long term effects of increased revenues was a short lived event. remember that he posted the largest deficit (up to that time) and remarked that "Deficits don't matter.".
Your history leaves a lot to be desired!
• Reichstolz WGN 2012/07/10 15:07:54
If one knows the economic history, the wealthy have never allowed the government to confiscate more than 18% of their net wealth annually, regardless the marginal rates. Don't believe me do some simple math on GDP versus tax reciepts. High tax rates lead to more sheltering of assets and less capital put to work.
• WGN Reichstolz 2012/07/10 16:30:38
The economic history of this country proves exactly the opposite. Look at the chart above!
• Reichstolz WGN 2012/07/10 16:57:44
Look at government revenue from tax receipts of those in the top earning bracket, you will find it stagnate throughout our history. Never once have those of us in the top bracket, allowed government to confiscate any more than 18% of net.
• Opinions4Free 2012/07/10 13:01:41
No
"It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation." - Barack Obama
• kevjon 2012/07/10 12:34:28
No
Lets see just how stupid we are, didn't Obama use this ploy in his election campaign in 08?
No one should have to pay more taxes, the government should quit spending like a drunken sailor!
Why is it that politicians feel that they can live the lavish lifestyles while we get taxed to hell and work like dogs. Why should politicians not have to play by the same rules we have to, they have even opted out of Obama care along with all their buddies.
As long as Obama can keep golfing, partying in the white house and going on these lavish multi million dollar vacations than no one should have to pay more taxes.

Is it really going to make people feel better knowing that the richer people are paying more taxes when the middle class will soon be getting hit with Obama care taxes, inheritance taxes, and losing all of the Bush tax credits? And by the way, the Bush tax credit helped the middle class not just the wealthier people.

All you little whining liberals that are trying to save face with this idiot in incompetence will be paying a huge amount of taxes when your so called save the poor health care tax goes into play for real. We all ready are paying all kinds of hidden taxes on it but the real tax is coming.
• darlenedoskas1969 2012/07/10 11:52:14 (edited)
It depends
higher earners use the government sponsored infrastructure more to earn that "extra" and they should indeed have to pay into building and maintaining that... should they pay a "disproportionate amount"? no... it should be proportionate... fair... unlike tax rates now, where the people paying the highest percentage of their wage to taxes is the middle class while those using the infrastructure the most (big business) are able to pay little or nothing thanks to "loopholes" and tax breaks
• HOMBRE darlene... 2012/07/10 11:59:36
Just a distraction. If Obama got his tax hike on class-warfare game he is playing its not enough money from the gains to keep country going for a week. All the clown is trying to do is distract from the real problems. This is just a (got you) game which will fail.Everything Obama has done to this country has hurt it. He is a looser narcosis with real mental problems
• SoD darlene... 2012/07/10 12:05:49
That's a nice chain of talking points, but it's inaccurate.

How does a physician, IT specialist, general contractor, restaurateur, or any other high earning profession use the infrastructure more than the clerk at the local convenience store?

Most of those tax breaks you speak of are a result of operating expenses. Do you think businesses should not only be taxed for profit but the cost of earning said profit as well? If so, you want to destroy all business.
• Reichstolz darlene... 2012/07/10 15:09:29
More really? Where do you get that conclusion from. And also considering we have a progressive tax system don't those with higher incomes pay more for that usage?
• Jeh 2012/07/10 11:45:45 (edited)
No
Get rid of tax loopholes, then start raising taxes if that doesn't fix the problem.
• HOMBRE Jeh 2012/07/10 12:02:26
Stop the spending these clowns are doing.
• Jeh HOMBRE 2012/07/14 10:54:07
On what exactly are they spending the money on that is so offensive?
• HOMBRE Jeh 2012/07/14 12:07:21
Look at the deficit we have .You tell me.Geeeesh
• Jeh HOMBRE 2012/07/17 07:46:17
You can't have your cake and eat it too, what do you want? Standard of life to not change or sacrifice in a recession for the greater good. From what I see America refuses to sacrifice their lifestyles, so with no jobs to back this standard up, the government must step in with social programs to maintain. So once again, what specifically is the offensive spending?
• HOMBRE Jeh 2012/07/17 17:32:15
Yep it sure is
• Tasine 2012/07/10 11:31:55
No
Income tax is demoralizing and is NOT voluntary - NO taxes are voluntary and that is equivalent to theft. No one's taxes should be raised- they should be lowered. Congress is responsible for the financial mess we are in, not the taxpayers, and we should demand THEY pay a LOT more than other citizens do. To be honest, Congress should stop spending what they don't have, and taxes should be lowered if jobs are to ever again come to America. We have self-serving imbeciles in Congress. This country is OURS to do OUR will. It does not belong to politicians and bureaucrats to be wasteful with our dollars then punish us for their irresponsibility.
• BlackwinterG36C 2012/07/10 10:01:48
No
They SAY the wealthy but they really mean anyone that owns more than one car. And if the wealthy are being taxed they either leave or pass the tax on to you the consumer. We'll just tax company A for no other reason than we dislike company A. And then they get surprised that company A has layoffs, outsources, and raises the prices on thier product to compensate for thier losses.
• Vieuphoria 2012/07/10 09:50:39
Yes
Yes and No.

Tax should be equal in percentage across the board. However, countries need to make it less easy for people to avoid paying. On average a poor person pays more than a rich person in tax, just because the rich have access to ways around the system. Tax dodgers are scum. Raping the country for all it has. They are the problems in society. Either leave the country, or pay your tax. No tax should be fair, everyone should pay the same. THat includes closing down tax avoidance loopholes.
• ComeOnNow Vieuphoria 2012/07/10 10:21:09
Statistically, that is simply not true. I agree with closing all loopholes and implementing a flat tax.
• luigi1- in god we trust 2012/07/10 09:44:36 (edited)
It depends
Give the wealthy the tax write off if they put their money in to creating real jobs through their investments.

If they choose to keep their money in their pockets, then tax but no more than 2% over. Remember, it's still their money. They made it, they should be able to keep it or we'll end up running them all out of the country.

This is the fastest way to create jobs.Then give additional tax breaks for companies that bring back offshored jobs. Reduce red tape & taxes to create jobs.

Only the wealthy can create jobs. Government gets in the way. Don't cook the goose that lays the golden egg.
• JCD aka "biz" 2012/07/10 09:31:36
Yes
Soak the wealthy parasites!

Remember the good ole days when Eisenhower was in the White House, and the top income tax rate was 91%!
• ComeOnNow JCD aka... 2012/07/10 10:22:34
You mean when the rest of the world was in shambles an we did ok in spite of the high taxes. I guess you are not paying attention that we have some global competition now. First off, where did you come up with this nonsensical hatred for all rich people that does not even make any sense, but a love for the rich. Elitist, power hungry, and corrupt politicians that do nothing but lie right to your face? It makes no sense.you Sound lke a lunatic OWS moron.

Nobody is proposing no government dummy. That argument is not even on the table and a piss pore argument to try to justify 40% of our GDP going to goverent spending, most of which is freaking waste. It shows that you can not even think of a good reason the government should be involved with every aspect of everything we do.
• Tasine ComeOnNow 2012/07/10 11:38:03
Perhaps no one nationally is proposing no government, but some of us individuals DO propose no federal government, and at the very, very least we propose a federal government that cannot touch or affect individuals, one which must go THROUGH the states to change or implement anything. I would go one further - one that does not consist of politicians, but of hired hands, hired by the states and answerable to the states who are answerable to the individuals.
• ComeOnNow Tasine 2012/07/10 11:59:55
That is how the country was founded and ran until Woodrow Wilson.