Online tax protest march

May I ask why now?

Income Taxes have not gone up since 1994, Obama is discussing a new income tax on .07 of the richest people in America which hardly represents a significant portion of the population.

And of course my favorite question to these people is this. 80% Government of government spending is on defense, medicare, and medicade. Which one of those programs do you wish to cut? More to the point, which GOP politician would be suicidal enough to even try?
 
Hmmm how did you arrive at 80%?
I thought the US current defense spending was somewhere in the ball park of 20% of the overall tax budget.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Hmmm how did you arrive at 80%?
I thought the US current defense spending was somewhere in the ball park of 20% of the overall tax budget.
Click to expand...
Rest is medicare, medicade & other entitlement programs that Obama's budget freeze exempts. I think they don't count ending Bush's tax reductions as a tax increase. Also think the "high income" types earn 250K @ the latest Dem. definition.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Hmmm how did you arrive at 80%?
I thought the US current defense spending was somewhere in the ball park of 20% of the overall tax budget.
Click to expand...

Good catch! and you are right. I confused taxing and spending. Its 80% of government spending and the reason why is because are current wars do not figure on tax budgets but are paid for by supplements not covered in fiscal budgets. Its a convenient way politicians gloss over the fact how much this little expedition is costing the taxpayer.

But if George thinks ending the wars would be a good way to cut down on government spending, well I could support that. Though the topic here is taxes. I do think the military could stand to lose some fat, there a a few military projects that could stand being canceled I am sure...

But again I ask, since we have had no tax increase in 16 years (no tax increase on the Middle-class much longer than that), why all of the sudden is the GOP worried about high taxes?

This is why I don't vote GOP, they take me for f***ing stupid or too lazy not to inform myself with the facts. No wonder they hate intellectuals and elitists so much, because these people actually bother to "check-the-facts" rather than "buy-the-hype" ala the Sarah Palin crowd.

And we all know what the GOP solution will be, they'll cut taxes mainly to the very rich and cover the budget shortfall by borrowing money from our "friends" like China and Saudi Arabia. Been there, done that, it was called the Bush Administration.

Its the same broke economic product they have been selling for the past 30 years in new packaging.


George

Also think the "high income" types earn 250K @ the latest Dem. definition.

Actually George I think it would fit almost everyone in the middle class and lower definition. If you've got an extra $250K you are not using by all means send it my way. I readily admit I had certain advantages growing up, but my family was never in the $250K catagory, not even close. $250K per year is a lot of money, some people don't make that in a lifetime. I could sure as hell use if you don't feel its that big a sum.
 
Last edited:
mmarsh said:
Good catch! and you are right. I confused taxing and spending. Its 80% of government spending and the reason why is because are current wars do not figure on tax budgets but are paid for by supplements not covered in fiscal budgets. Its a convenient way politicians gloss over the fact how much this little expedition is costing the taxpayer.

But if George thinks ending the wars would be a good way to cut down on government spending, well I could support that. Though the topic here is taxes. I do think the military could stand to lose some fat, there a a few military projects that could stand being canceled I am sure...

But again I ask, since we have had no tax increase in 16 years (no tax increase on the Middle-class much longer than that), why all of the sudden is the GOP worried about high taxes?

This is why I don't vote GOP, they take me for f***ing stupid or too lazy not to inform myself with the facts. No wonder they hate intellectuals and elitists so much, because these people actually bother to "check-the-facts" rather than "buy-the-hype" ala the Sarah Palin crowd.

And we all know what the GOP solution will be, they'll cut taxes mainly to the very rich and cover the budget shortfall by borrowing money from our "friends" like China and Saudi Arabia. Been there, done that, it was called the Bush Administration.

Its the same broke economic product they have been selling for the past 30 years in new packaging.


George

Also think the "high income" types earn 250K @ the latest Dem. definition.

Actually George I think it would fit almost everyone in the middle class and lower definition. If you've got an extra $250K you are not using by all means send it my way. I readily admit I had certain advantages growing up, but my family was never in the $250K catagory, not even close. $250K per year is a lot of money, some people don't make that in a lifetime. I could sure as hell use if you don't feel its that big a sum.
Click to expand...
I don't put 250K in hyper rich .07% category. That is small business owner category, you know, the guys that Obama supposedly is counting on to provide jobs. Smack em with big tax increases isn't to bright. Also my comments was about entitlements.
 
Actually it is a pretty small business at quarter of a million per year and I would assume that is not raw profit either.

If it is a quarter of a million before paying wages and other expenses, it is a very small business.
 
I for one support having income taxes. I don't care what far fetched idear these anti-tax folks come up with on covering the expenses, but face it- having the many benefits we have now would not be available otherwise. You may not think of them as benefits, but think of everything we have now that is supported by tax dollars. Can we live without them? Of course. But it's a luxury many of us grew up with.
 
I am going to say you have to be insane to think we can run $1.6 trillion deficits and not raise taxes.

Tax increases are coming. Then, only then, will Americans realize the true cost of the resent run of deficit spending.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
I guess the idea is that all these things would be privately run.
Click to expand...
Won't work. Well, I stand corrected. It would. BUT....it also will cost far more than just paying taxes.

And people will cry out "it's not paid by the taxes, it's paid by the FED!". And always by the same people that want the IRS dismantled, that don't want to pay income tax (most usually ANY tax for that matter), and so far every damn one of them also want drugs legalized.

I look at the big picture and see an anti-American insurgency that is trying to destroy America from the inside.

Harder to defend a country that is already defeated on the inside.
 
Hmmm said:
Won't work. Well, I stand corrected. It would. BUT....it also will cost far more than just paying taxes.

And people will cry out "it's not paid by the taxes, it's paid by the FED!". And always by the same people that want the IRS dismantled, that don't want to pay income tax (most usually ANY tax for that matter), and so far every damn one of them also want drugs legalized.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what? Those same people are also the ones screaming for the government to stay out of private life (Libertarians, aka hard right conservatives). They may want drugs legalized, but only because they believe that the government has no say in the matter.

It's a fascinating circle, politics. On the far right, you have those Libertarians who feel that the government should have absolutely no say in what the people can and cannot do, and then on the far left, you have people screaming the same things. It's really quite interesting to see how blurred the line gets on the extremes.
 
Hmmm said:
Won't work. Well, I stand corrected. It would. BUT....it also will cost far more than just paying taxes.
Click to expand...

Yes and that is largely the current system right now.
I don't agree with it necessarily but just pointing out that's their argument.
 
Rob Henderson said:
Sorry, what? Those same people are also the ones screaming for the government to stay out of private life (Libertarians, aka hard right conservatives). They may want drugs legalized, but only because they believe that the government has no say in the matter.

It's a fascinating circle, politics. On the far right, you have those Libertarians who feel that the government should have absolutely no say in what the people can and cannot do, and then on the far left, you have people screaming the same things. It's really quite interesting to see how blurred the line gets on the extremes.
Click to expand...
Libertarians have positions that attract & repel both Liberals & Conservatives. Main focus is personal freedom, that's why they want to Legalize/decriminalize drugs & keep the Govt. out of the bedroom( both Liberal positions) & want Govt. to be as nonintrusive as possible(Conservative position).
 
I have been doing a lot of research in the Federalist and Antifederalist papers. The founders were dead set on consumption (in today's term sales) tax. I cannot remember how many times taxes of consumption were mentioned in the Federalist Papers. I wish the Constitution had declared income as property. That way no government could touch it until you decide to spend it.

The Antifederalist papers went off on tax collectors. There are some choice words for those who did the collecting for the government.

The Antifederalist papers also said that the proposed Constitution gave too much power to Congress. They said there were not enough checks and balances and the General Welfare clause basically gave Congress the right to do pass almost any law they felt was in the general welfare of the United States.

I find it too interesting that many of the criticisms and fears of the Constitution back in the 1780's have come true.
 
Last edited:
George said:
Libertarians have positions that attract & repel both Liberals & Conservatives. Main focus is personal freedom, that's why they want to Legalize/decriminalize drugs & keep the Govt. out of the bedroom( both Liberal positions) & want Govt. to be as nonintrusive as possible(Conservative position).
Click to expand...
Which is basically what I said in the second part of my post when I said, "It's really quite interesting to see how blurred the lines really get on the extremes."
 
Rob Henderson said:
Which is basically what I said in the second part of my post when I said, "It's really quite interesting to see how blurred the lines really get on the extremes."
Click to expand...
Not sure if a group that believes in personal freedom or liberty is really "extreme", unless the people have been trained to be controlled, & is seperate from discussions of extreme Left/Right, where they both go Authoritarian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top