Poll: Large Majorities Back Raising Taxes On Wealthy, Oppose Raising Medicare Age RAVE if You Agree
Che Guevara - Hero
2012/11/28 19:02:13
|
|
|||||
|
269 votes
|
|
85% | ||
|
48 votes
|
|
15% | ||
The proposal to raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 annually — one of President Obama's central campaign pitches — continues to be popular among a large majority of Americans, according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll out Wednesday.
Sixty percent of those surveyed support the proposal, compared with just 37 percent who are opposed. The debate over raising taxes on the high-income earners was one of the defining issues of the 2012 campaign, although polls have consistently shown broad support for the proposal backed by Obama and the Democrats.
Meanwhile, an even larger portion of Americans — 67 percent — are opposed to raising the age for Medicare coverage from 65 to 67. Some Republicans such as Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) have suggested raising the Medicare eligibility age as part of their proposal to avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff."
Democrats, Republicans and independents also unite in opposition to hiking the entry age for Medicare, with the opposition particularly stiff among Democrats. Opposition to such a change peaks (naturally) among those aged 50 to 64 — the very people who will soon reap those benefits.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-large-majori...
Sixty percent of those surveyed support the proposal, compared with just 37 percent who are opposed. The debate over raising taxes on the high-income earners was one of the defining issues of the 2012 campaign, although polls have consistently shown broad support for the proposal backed by Obama and the Democrats.
Meanwhile, an even larger portion of Americans — 67 percent — are opposed to raising the age for Medicare coverage from 65 to 67. Some Republicans such as Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) have suggested raising the Medicare eligibility age as part of their proposal to avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff."
Democrats, Republicans and independents also unite in opposition to hiking the entry age for Medicare, with the opposition particularly stiff among Democrats. Opposition to such a change peaks (naturally) among those aged 50 to 64 — the very people who will soon reap those benefits.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-large-majori...
Top Opinion
-
Yes, The Rich Need To Pay Their Fair Share
+23The rich and their GOP political pocketeers want us to believe that people are living longer and that is why we must raise the medicare and SS age. But when you look at the statistics, it is only the wealthy that are living longer, not everyone.
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do…
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner sug...
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do…
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
So, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something VERY important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
That, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
LOVE IT!!!
The best way to help the poor is not to have more government programs which mainly benefit the bureaucrats who get paid good money to run them, but to stop criminalizing ways that poor people can become self-sufficient and economically independent:
• Make it legal for people to make money using their cars as taxis to charge people for rides
• Make it legal for people to sell stuff on public streets without a business license or other government taxes or fees
• End the "War on Drugs" and stop filling up the jails with poor people (see http://www.sfweekly.com/2012-... )
• Eliminate sales taxes so that poor people are not charged extra by government when they buy stuff
• Stop creating inflation (rising prices on goods and services) by the Federal Reserve creating more money out of thin air and reducing the value of every existing dollar -- inflation is a regressive tax that falls heaviest on the poor
Do you believe government will do a better job spending your...
The best way to help the poor is not to have more government programs which mainly benefit the bureaucrats who get paid good money to run them, but to stop criminalizing ways that poor people can become self-sufficient and economically independent:
• Make it legal for people to make money using their cars as taxis to charge people for rides
• Make it legal for people to sell stuff on public streets without a business license or other government taxes or fees
• End the "War on Drugs" and stop filling up the jails with poor people (see http://www.sfweekly.com/2012-... )
• Eliminate sales taxes so that poor people are not charged extra by government when they buy stuff
• Stop creating inflation (rising prices on goods and services) by the Federal Reserve creating more money out of thin air and reducing the value of every existing dollar -- inflation is a regressive tax that falls heaviest on the poor
Do you believe government will do a better job spending your money than you will? Perhaps you want more $1 billion bombers, or six-figure salaries of Washington bureaucrats? If so, I think you're a fool, but you're welcome to write the IRS a bigger check.
If you're not so sure you want to give government more of your own money, then don't support them stealing more of other people's money. Just because someone is wealthy doesn't make it right to rob them. If you have a good cause, persuade people to donate voluntarily. That's the right thing to do. Envy and hate are not pretty.