Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman
"The truth is that everybody has to pay more taxes, not just the rich."
Howard Dean
"Beating up on "the rich" is a politically-convenient ploy for the moment, but the math doesn't lie:
Taxing only the upper echelons of income earners and small businesses would reap an insufficient pittance in the final analysis.
The government's unsustainable spending will soon require many more people to pay their "fair share" to the federal government.
Some voters who are currently on board with the Left's soak-the-rich crusade will one day (perhaps soon) discover that they themselves are the new "rich," with of their livelihood and income suddenly in Big Government's crosshairs. Dean is at least doing everyone a favor by serving notice early. He is very enthusiastic about middle class tax increases and deep defense cuts, but very protective of all other spending."
|
I agree with Senator Dean.
But thank dog, someone on the board besides Adak has at last come to defense of the poor, down trodden upper 2% in wealth. You go, Classic!
If the math doesn't lie, then give us the god damn numbers, and at the very least, use ones put out by the CBO - not ones drawn out of the thin air by some outfit like the Heriage Foundation. Give us ANYTHING besides an uncollaborated statement.
The average median household income was around $51000 in 2011, a mere $200,000 below the income level targeted for a return to the Clinton era rates. Today Donald Trump and tomorrow Ibby.
Please define what you would consider a "fair share" of taxes, too. What? 5% for Trump and 0% for everyone else, or better yet, 0% on Trump and 5% on single Moms earning less than $10,000/year? Whatever because the US doesn't really need a government, anyway, since Goldman Sachs is already doing the job?
Also, since you seem comfortable using Tea Party terminology, could you please define what you mean by "small businesses" - especially the SMALL part? Seriously, I really want know.
Another question I have is why are you upset by the thought of cuts to defense spending? The war in Afghanistan is winding down. Mission accomplished in Iraq. (ahem) Maybe you'd like the US to declare war on the remaining two members of the "axis of evil": Iraq and North Korea? Why not declare war on Canada as well? We could get all that oil, and I bet the Canadian army would be a push over.
What are you a defense contractor or something?
Now, since we are at war on the Canadian and Iranian and N. Korean fronts and Goldman Sachs has decided to outsource the Army to Rwanda, what do you suggest happen to the earned benefits that the American people paid all those taxes for out of their hard earned paychecks? That amount comes to quite a bit and every last one of us who worked for even a day or two paid into those funds.
Oh, I forgot. Those are now called "entitlements" and that money was given to Donald Trump, so he wouldn't have to pay an extra .001% toward the cost of our Rwandan mercenaries.
Good thing we no longer have to worry about the government throwing money at such fripperies as education, infrastructure, and disaster relief for worthless states on the stupid East Coast like New Jersey.
And it's a relief to be rid of all those old people and the disabled ones, too - bunch of worthless parasites. Glad we took away their housing and medicaid and put 'em out on the street to die.
We'll show YOU, Howard Dean!