You and your party had 8 years of genuflecting at the feet of the super wealthy and the only real thing that I see that it acomplished was to further the wealth disparity in this country. So IMO they can afford to pay 35% instead of 28%, its just a small price to pay to live in a country that provided the opportunity for them to have multi-million dollar homes, private jets and luxury automobiles. :ohbrother:

 

On a complete sidebar, "genuflecting" is an outstanding word and I applaud you for using it.:thumb: I believe you should be exempt from any criticism for one day.

Yes, YOU would. But someone who didn't have it handed to them might not. Someone who maybe spent several extra years in college working and studying 12-15 hours a day might not. Someone who risked their entire life savings and worked 80 hours a week building up their business or their career might not. Someone who uprooted and moved their family every 18 months to take on greater responsibilities might not. It's always ok for the other guy to pay more, isn't it?

 

 

This statement makes alot of assumptions. First, that those who have advanced degrees are "making the big bucks and unwilling to pay extra taxes." I have a graduate degree, which I worked my butt off to get, while raising a family. There are alot of teachers, firefighters, medical personnell (not counting doctors) who have advanced edcuation, who have worked hard, who will never approach that 250k mark.

 

Most of the folks who invest their life savings to start a business, are small business owners and also, never make that much money. I just do not think it is wrong for those who make "a lot" more to pay "a little" more in taxes.

THIS is exactly what Obama is shooting for. No class envy or warfare? Sure.

 

I didn't know rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans would be considered class warfare.....:isurrender:

On a complete sidebar, "genuflecting" is an outstanding word and I applaud you for using it.:thumb: I believe you should be exempt from any criticism for one day.

 

Thanks I hope everyone else agrees

On a complete sidebar, "genuflecting" is an outstanding word and I applaud you for using it.:thumb: I believe you should be exempt from any criticism for one day.

It was a good word. Too bad it's use we deflated by the rest of the post.

You and your party had 8 years of genuflecting at the feet of the super wealthy and the only real thing that I see that it acomplished was to further the wealth disparity in this country. So IMO they can afford to pay 35% instead of 28%, its just a small price to pay to live in a country that provided the opportunity for them to have multi-million dollar homes, private jets and luxury automobiles. :ohbrother:

Who is my party? You know what they say when you assume.

 

Because your work hard and make something of yourself means you should pay more then your share? :ohbrother:That's the great thing about this country, everyone has the same opportunity in life. It's what you make of it that counts. Why should someone that makes $500,000 a year pay a higher percentage of tax then someone that makes $50,000 a year? Because they have more money?

Just a thought: Is taxing at higher rates constitutional for those that make more money, it seems to me that is discrimination... just a thought... continue:popcorn:

You and your party had 8 years of genuflecting at the feet of the super wealthy and the only real thing that I see that it acomplished was to further the wealth disparity in this country. So IMO they can afford to pay 35% instead of 28%, its just a small price to pay to live in a country that provided the opportunity for them to have multi-million dollar homes, private jets and luxury automobiles. :ohbrother:

Thank you for proving me right. :lol:

I didn't know rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans would be considered class warfare.....

 

 

You and your party had 8 years of genuflecting at the feet of the super wealthy and the only real thing that I see that it acomplished was to further the wealth disparity in this country. So IMO they can afford to pay 35% instead of 28%, its just a small price to pay to live in a country that provided the opportunity for them to have multi-million dollar homes, private jets and luxury automobiles. :ohbrother:

 

Class envy bolded.

 

What exactly is a "fair" percentage?

 

Overall what percentage of taxes do those in this income range already pay?

 

And no I'm not one of them nor will I likely ever be but I don't think that it's fair at all (since that concept seems to be the rage of lefties) to penalize someone because they have been fortunate enough to become wealthy.

Class envy bolded.

 

What exactly is a "fair" percentage?

 

Overall what percentage of taxes do those in this income range already pay?

 

And no I'm not one of them nor will I likely ever be but I don't think that it's fair at all (since that concept seems to be the rage of lefties) to penalize someone because they have been fortunate enough to become wealthy.

 

It's not class envy, I would love to be in that class and if I were I wouldn't be belly aching about paying a 35% income tax. I obviously feel 35% is a fair figure.

 

The top ten percent of income earners pay around 1/3 of the income taxes. Can you tell me what percentage of the wealth in this country that they control?

 

Why do the righties insist on continuing to punish those who haven't been fourtunate enough to hit the genetic lottery or the educational environment to succeed. I know I know they should pull themselves up by their boot straps......

Thank you for proving me right. :lol:

 

You prove yourself right, right of even Rush and Hannity everyday. I do disagree with you on just about everything politically which is a good place to be.

Why are wealth and income always co-mingled by those who support the Democratic agenda? One has almost nothing to do with the other.

This statement makes alot of assumptions. First, that those who have advanced degrees are "making the big bucks and unwilling to pay extra taxes." I have a graduate degree, which I worked my butt off to get, while raising a family. There are alot of teachers, firefighters, medical personnell (not counting doctors) who have advanced edcuation, who have worked hard, who will never approach that 250k mark.

 

Most of the folks who invest their life savings to start a business, are small business owners and also, never make that much money. I just do not think it is wrong for those who make "a lot" more to pay "a little" more in taxes.

 

No assumptions, just pointing out how MANY of these people got to where they are. Also, those making "a lot" more are already paying "a whole lot more" than the rest of us. Keep adding "a little" more to them and see what happens.

I didn't know rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans would be considered class warfare.....:isurrender:

 

Now you do.

Who is my party? You know what they say when you assume.

 

Because your work hard and make something of yourself means you should pay more then your share? :ohbrother:That's the great thing about this country, everyone has the same opportunity in life. It's what you make of it that counts. Why should someone that makes $500,000 a year pay a higher percentage of tax then someone that makes $50,000 a year? Because they have more money?

 

If you really think that this is true further debate is a waste of time.....

 

 

To your series of questions IMO yes because they have more money. Our country is at its best when we have a strong middle class and everyone who WANTS to do good can. The government has to provide defense and other social services that have to be funded. If someone making 35k a year is taxed at 25% that means they are bringing home just over 25k a year and that is not even including health insurance premiums. Someone making 350k taxed at 35% brings home around 228k, so the precentage is higher but I'll think we can agree that the person making 350k can afford to feed and cloth a family a little easier with thier tax burden. By the way 350k is currently not even in the 35% income tax range and I don't know that I've ever even met anyone in that income bracket. I know you disagree but this is what I believe; I'm not a social darwinist.