Quantcast

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
You!
Add Photos & Videos
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.
tax hike families earning 250000 extension bush-era tax rates families

Read More: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/09/obama-t...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ProudPr... txpatriot 2012/07/09 23:03:13
    ProudProgressive
    Good. Get the greedy destructive oligarchs out of this country altogether. We do NOT have a spending problem in this country. "Spending problem" is Republican doublespeak for "we want to take more away from those who need it the most so we can give more to those who need it the least."
  • txpatriot ProudPr... 2012/07/11 21:44:24
    txpatriot
    If all the bad wealthy people left the country and took jobs with them, then what would you do for your taxpayer-funded lifestyle? So, when there is $14 billion fraud in the food stamp program, I guess that's OK with you...the money comes from the hardworking Americans who still have a job and who cares about that fool? What does he think...he works for a living instead of having his hand out for a freeride.
  • Roger 2012/07/09 21:42:39
    No
    Roger
    +3
    A poor man never offered me a job. Neither will a rich man if they take all his money in taxes.
  • Mr.Hoodz the Truth Troll 2012/07/09 21:40:37
    No
    Mr.Hoodz the Truth Troll
    +4
    There should be no tax hike for ANYONE. Taxing income is THEFT. Plain and simple.The rules never apply for everyone.
  • starguide 2012/07/09 21:39:41
    Yes
    starguide
    +1
    if it creates a hardship on the rich, they will have to live without ... a few luxuries
  • ~HopelessRomanticM17~ 2012/07/09 21:39:08
    Yes
    ~HopelessRomanticM17~
    I'm not completely sure.
  • DJL 2012/07/09 21:30:43
    No
    DJL
    +5
    The bottom 46% pay no federal income tax. It is not the people making more than $250,000 that aren't payng their fair share. We have a spending problem that taxing more cannot correct.
  • tesmith47 2012/07/09 21:30:11
    Yes
    tesmith47
    yes because those who get the multi million dollar incomes benefit most from our system and in return should pay more.
    i think all salarys under $50,000 should not be taxed at all, right now the working poor pay a bigger % of their low salarys than the wealthy, and the very wealthy whose income is non earned ie stocks and bonds pay even less % wise then the man digging a ditch
  • the fuze tesmith47 2012/07/10 01:09:41
    the fuze
    I make under 50K and have no problem paying my taxes. I use some of the services our taxes go towards, why should I get them for free?
  • Marie 2012/07/09 21:26:53
    It depends
    Marie
    It should be per person, not couple- if at all!
  • DS in Oak Ridge NC 2012/07/09 21:17:37
    No
    DS in Oak Ridge NC
    +4
    Half of us pay all the taxes, and half get a free ride. Fix that before you ask for more. If fixing that means getting people back to work, ending life-long or generational dependence on welfare, and instilling - and expecting - self-reliance, than so be it.
  • tesmith47 DS in O... 2012/07/09 21:32:29
    tesmith47
    tell that to the multibillion dollar corporations that pay NO taxes and get government subsideys ,
    or the multi milllionare farmes who get paid NOT TO GROW CROPS AND GET PAID WHEN THEIR CROPS DONT SELL FOR THE PRICE THEY WANT!!!!
  • Donald Eric Kesler 2012/07/09 21:16:09
    Yes
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +2
    We should return the taxes to the level that existed prior to 2001.
  • santa6642 2012/07/09 21:14:41
    No
    santa6642
    +3
    They pay the greatest share already. It's time for those who pay no tax to start paying.Share the wealth , share the pin.
  • HillaryLover 2012/07/09 21:14:27
    No
    HillaryLover
    +1
    $500,000 a year, yes.
  • Stentor 2012/07/09 21:13:37
    Yes
    Stentor
    +3
    Who are all these people voting no? There can't be that many millionaires on this board. Who are all the wankers siding with the rich? Tax rates are lower than they've ever been, and look at the mess this country is in. Republicans want to destroy government, & yet we allow them to be elected to public office. The wealthy need to pay for infrastructure, & the regulatory agencies that police business to keep the rest of us safe from their rapacious mendacity. Remember, business will always try to get away with anything they can, it's why we have regulatory agencies like the SEC, EPA, OSHA, NOAA, FAA, NTSB, & many others. Ordinary people shouldn't have to bear that cost, the businesses should have to bear the cost of their historic misdeeds, besides they will always have an antagonistic relationship with the government.
  • tesmith47 Stentor 2012/07/09 21:34:21
    tesmith47
    +1
    Thank you for saying that, the problem is that a lot of guys still think tha tone day they too will be in the 1% because what the hell, they are white guys too justlike the 1% are!!!!
  • cddjmikey tesmith47 2012/07/09 21:43:13
    cddjmikey
    +1
    Tell that to JZ or Kanye or Tyler Perry or Chris Rock or Spike Lee ! I am pretty sure they ALL are 1%ers and if they feel sooooooo obliged to help out WHY aren't they donating some of their excess cash to pay down the debt ?
  • mich52 2012/07/09 21:11:02 (edited)
    Yes
    mich52
    +1
    I think they should raise it to 1 million myself otherwise end them for everyone if the rich need to be greedy..
  • alun.palmer 2012/07/09 20:45:04
    Yes
    alun.palmer
    +2
    Because that's more than I make, LOL!
  • Mark P. 2012/07/09 20:34:55
    No
    Mark P.
    +3
    Fair share means everyone pays.
  • angelbaby 2012/07/09 20:32:50
    No
    angelbaby
    +3
    Equal tax rates for ALL!!
  • santa6642 angelbaby 2012/07/09 21:16:06
    santa6642
    +3
    including those that pay nothing at all.
  • tesmith47 santa6642 2012/07/09 21:35:21
    tesmith47
    +1
    lots of corporations and wealthy folks who offshore their money or play tricks to avoid paying
  • angelbaby santa6642 2012/07/10 01:37:50
    angelbaby
    Are you talking about the "freeloaders"?
  • Cyan9 2012/07/09 20:30:45 (edited)
    Yes
    Cyan9
    +4
    Indubitably.
  • susan 2012/07/09 20:28:00
    It depends
    susan
    +3
    People making $250,000+, whether individuals or couples, already pay more. Their effective tax rate is higher, and, if they own a small business, they pay twice. The first time at 35% corporate rate, then again when they take the money they earn out of the business. In addition, if they work in the business and draw a salary, their payroll tax is double what their employees pay, as they have to pay both the employees' half and employers' half.
    Increasing the taxes on these people, who are not really the "rich," but are the ones who are out there risking everything to create jobs for the rest of us, is stupid, ignorant and further erodes the economic health of the economy.
  • Roger47 2012/07/09 20:27:37
    Yes
    Roger47
    +6
    Anyone who hass a real concern for our debt understands that we cannot continue to increase it needlessly. Extending these cuts on the very rich does that.
  • Gahnzo 2012/07/09 20:22:40
    No
    Gahnzo
    +4
    What is the point of trying to earn more, if the government just takes more of it away. Class envy has historically, always been around, and it will never go away.. and I would like someone, somewhere, to show me a country that operates on total equality of all goods and services and not on inherent greed principles. Or perhaps I should say show me one that currently operates with the total equality principles of socialism.....and don't try and use the "well it's just never been properly implemented"... If socialism was sooo great, don't you think it would have been implemented properly within the last couple thousand years? Yeah I thought so... I can hear the birds chirping.. JMO
  • Stentor Gahnzo 2013/01/26 07:23:21 (edited)
    Stentor
    I have no idea where you think you live, but this is a socialist country. We have socialized education, socialized police, socialized fire departments, socialized municipal utilities, etc. What do you think those institutions were 200 years ago? People paid for fire insurance, security forces known as Citizens On Patrol (COPs), private schools, private utilities, until the government decided that it was a common good for those things to be absorbed as a function of government.
    Social Security is an institution of socialized government set into place as part of the New Deal by President Roosevelt so that the elderly wouldn't fall into extreme poverty, Medicare, Medicaid & the recent generalized socialization of medicine with the passage of the ACA is the latest aspect of our society becoming increasingly socialized. Face it, you live in a reasonably successful model of socialized government. If you didn't ever recognize it, it's because nobody ever explicitly pointed it out to you before. Socialism is not Communism, & Libertarians are the ones who claim that libertarianism can't fail, only those who don't implement it properly. Marxism, Communism, Libertarianism, these are the forms of government that will never be successful because of the element of human selfishness & greed.
    If ...&&
    &
    I have no idea where you think you live, but this is a socialist country. We have socialized education, socialized police, socialized fire departments, socialized municipal utilities, etc. What do you think those institutions were 200 years ago? People paid for fire insurance, security forces known as Citizens On Patrol (COPs), private schools, private utilities, until the government decided that it was a common good for those things to be absorbed as a function of government.
    Social Security is an institution of socialized government set into place as part of the New Deal by President Roosevelt so that the elderly wouldn't fall into extreme poverty, Medicare, Medicaid & the recent generalized socialization of medicine with the passage of the ACA is the latest aspect of our society becoming increasingly socialized. Face it, you live in a reasonably successful model of socialized government. If you didn't ever recognize it, it's because nobody ever explicitly pointed it out to you before. Socialism is not Communism, & Libertarians are the ones who claim that libertarianism can't fail, only those who don't implement it properly. Marxism, Communism, Libertarianism, these are the forms of government that will never be successful because of the element of human selfishness & greed.
    If we have an increasingly unstable society due to elements such as the labor market contributing to this state of affairs, then we need to be able to take care of the weakest of us, the elderly, the children, the disabled, & especially the veterans because they have served their country. This is an idea that is Christianity in action, yet I see conservatives & Republicans eschewing these kinds of beliefs in favor of a society where everyone is left to fend for themselves, an idea that is in direct contradiction to the phrase in the preamble to the Constitution to "promote the general welfare" in this country.
    This is a liberal country, the majority of people approve of liberal ideas whether they know them to be liberal or not. We are not a center-right country despite all the rending of garments, caterwauling, & pearl-clutching by the rightwing that we are. The loudness of your rhetoric has, in no way, any relevance to the correctness of your positions.
    (more)
  • Gahnzo Stentor 2013/01/26 17:03:17
    Gahnzo
    Sorry Stentor, we may have established socialized aspects or duties of this country (fire, police, utilities), but that is a significant difference from Socialism. With the left it's always if we just invest more... if we just take a little more..... the problem is that there is never enough... when you ask a liberal or progressive (whichever is in vogue) they can never say.. THIS...(X) is how much the rich should pay, or how much should go for schools, or how many taxes should be enough. There never is enough. I notice that you live in California... hows that leftist mentality working out... how many cites are going bankrupt, your state is in major financial trouble, businesses are leaving in DROVES... and the left mentality continues to want to spend and tax their way out of problems.. If conservatives are so bad... why is Texas doing so well, why is Ms. Tina Turner giving up her U.S. Citizenship, why is the wealthiest man in France moving out of France and taking all his money with him.. Why do you think the rich are moving their money off shore... or moving where taxes are low.. DUH. because they want to KEEP WHAT THEY EARN...if people were allowed to keep what they earn they would be glad to pay their fair share.. however, with the left, they can never define what fair sh...
    Sorry Stentor, we may have established socialized aspects or duties of this country (fire, police, utilities), but that is a significant difference from Socialism. With the left it's always if we just invest more... if we just take a little more..... the problem is that there is never enough... when you ask a liberal or progressive (whichever is in vogue) they can never say.. THIS...(X) is how much the rich should pay, or how much should go for schools, or how many taxes should be enough. There never is enough. I notice that you live in California... hows that leftist mentality working out... how many cites are going bankrupt, your state is in major financial trouble, businesses are leaving in DROVES... and the left mentality continues to want to spend and tax their way out of problems.. If conservatives are so bad... why is Texas doing so well, why is Ms. Tina Turner giving up her U.S. Citizenship, why is the wealthiest man in France moving out of France and taking all his money with him.. Why do you think the rich are moving their money off shore... or moving where taxes are low.. DUH. because they want to KEEP WHAT THEY EARN...if people were allowed to keep what they earn they would be glad to pay their fair share.. however, with the left, they can never define what fair share is... it's always moving.. and the conservatives are not "fend for yourself", but the left is if you have a hangnail you can get disability for that... I have no problem with taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves, but I don't understand how/why immigrant to our country can receive SSI or SSD benefits when they have paid nothing into it... I thank you for your thoughtful posting.... and good luck with the situation in Cali...
    (more)
  • Stentor Gahnzo 2013/01/28 06:16:12
    Stentor
    If you have socialized aspects of society that didn't exist previously, guess what? You have socialized society to a greater extent than before. I don't know what kind of taxes you believe existed in this country previously, but everyone decries the Golden Age of America as being the 40s, 50s, & 60s. Taxes were much higher then, after WWII, the highest bracket was 90%, lowered down to 80%, then 72% where it stayed during the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, & Carter. It was only during the adminstration of Reagan that the top marginal rate was halved & the tax burden was shifted to the middle class by raising the two lowest rates by a considerable margin.
    The wealthy parking their money in offshore accounts is merely tax avoidance because of a mentality of greed, nothing else. The wealthy in this country don't work any harder than you do, or are any smarter than you or I, they are only luckier than you or I. Luck shouldn't determine who gets ahead in America, it runs counter to the American Dream that with hard work & initiative, anyone can get ahead & make a life for themselves.
    I disagree with your contention that businesses are leaving in droves, we still have the greatest job engines around in both Northern & Southern California in the electronics, aer...&
    &
    If you have socialized aspects of society that didn't exist previously, guess what? You have socialized society to a greater extent than before. I don't know what kind of taxes you believe existed in this country previously, but everyone decries the Golden Age of America as being the 40s, 50s, & 60s. Taxes were much higher then, after WWII, the highest bracket was 90%, lowered down to 80%, then 72% where it stayed during the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, & Carter. It was only during the adminstration of Reagan that the top marginal rate was halved & the tax burden was shifted to the middle class by raising the two lowest rates by a considerable margin.
    The wealthy parking their money in offshore accounts is merely tax avoidance because of a mentality of greed, nothing else. The wealthy in this country don't work any harder than you do, or are any smarter than you or I, they are only luckier than you or I. Luck shouldn't determine who gets ahead in America, it runs counter to the American Dream that with hard work & initiative, anyone can get ahead & make a life for themselves.
    I disagree with your contention that businesses are leaving in droves, we still have the greatest job engines around in both Northern & Southern California in the electronics, aerospace/defense, commercial aerospace, medical electronics, & many other science industries as well as the entertainment juggernauts.
    You know I live in California, which is true, but I grew up in Nebraska, where unemployment was double-digits during the administration of Ronald Reagan for many years, & they had more republicans in office than democrats statewide, so that argument doesn't carry. Secondly, the stats in Texas are manipulated, for all states, job creation in Massachusetts actually outpaced that of Texas from 2008-2010. While over 126,000 net jobs were created in Texas over the last 2-1/2 years the labor force expanded by over 437,000, meaning that overall Texas has added unemployed workers at a rate much faster than it has created jobs. The fact is Texas has done worse than the rest of the country since the peak of national unemployment in October 2009. The unemployment rate in Texas has been steadily increasing throughout the recession, and went from 7.7 to 8.2 percent while the state was supposedly creating 40 percent of all the new jobs in the U.S. I'll take the gubenatorial management skills of Jerry Brown over those of Rick Perry anyday.
    Bureau of Labor Statistics for all 50 States
    (more)
  • Gahnzo Stentor 2013/02/04 20:24:18
  • Gahnzo Stentor 2013/02/04 20:26:20
  • jeepster4 2012/07/09 20:14:52
    Yes
    jeepster4
    +4
    The only solution to the problem the right have created is to return the taxes to the level that existed prior to 2001.
  • Liberty... jeepster4 2012/07/09 20:22:11
    Libertys Martyr
    +3
    The problem we have is that spending levels are almost twice what we collect in revenues through our already high taxes. So as we debate "balancing the budget" in the foreseeable future, you can guarantee congress will claim the need to raise revenue, rather than cut spending (the obvious solution). We will likely NEVER see a lower tax rate than we have now, let alone go back to a 2001 taxation level.
  • jeepster4 Liberty... 2012/07/09 22:49:45
    jeepster4
    Like I said, we have a revenue problem. We kept two wars off the books until 2009. President Obama changed that. Now we need to reduce our bloated military to a reasonable size and increase our spending on infrastructure. We tried the trickle down theory for the last 30 years and we ended up with out of date infrastructure, a transfer of wealth to the top 1%, and a massive recession. Now is the time to change our economy to a modern mixed economy,
  • Gahnzo jeepster4 2012/07/09 20:37:28
    Gahnzo
    +5
    the problem the RIGHT has created? Seriously... LMFAO... the Dems have had control since 2006 both the House and Senate for Bush's last two years in office. Then BHO had the trifecta of majorities in both house and senate from 08 till 10.. and you blame the Right? Man please give me some of what you been smoking cuz it's gotta be better than anything I could find. Besides Jeepster.. it's a spending problem.....may I remind you that there is NO SUCH THING AS A "FREE" LUNCH???? Someone has to pay for it...but like a good Democrat they are free to spend money.. so long as it's someone elses... I like to think that a person should evaluate the outcome of a program NOT the intentions.. but seems like the Dems only want to evaluate their intentions.. never whether a program they implement is successful, but rather look at how they intended it to be..
  • mich52 Gahnzo 2012/07/09 21:13:53
    mich52
    +1
    Save yourself anymore embarrassment, start or learn what research is...
  • Tom Degan 2012/07/09 20:03:46
    Yes
    Tom Degan
    +7
    Make that a "YES" in capital letters.

    Here's what the right wing doesn't get: There is one way - and ONLY one way - out of the mess they have made of our economic infrastructure during the past thirty years, and it will involve taxes - decades of SERIOUS taxation.

    What class of people has the responsibility for bearing the burden? The poor? The working class? The middle class? The upper middle class even? How 'bout the plutocracy? Now there's a novel idea, huh?

    Am I waging class warfare here? You'd better believe it, Buster. And I ain't takin' no prisoners, baby!

    http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

    Tom Degan

    Tom Degan

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/22 17:33:44

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals