This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
  • retiredindependentpopo Nov 30, 7:59 p.m.

    The rich pay _less_ of their disposable income than anyone else does. Including those who pay NO income tax (because most of them pay plenty of OTHER taxes).

    This is exactly what John Kerry did when he bought a yatch and mored it in a differing state that his own. Cheaper taxes!!!!!

  • Tug Boat II Nov 30, 7:59 p.m.

    I guarantee that a deal will be struck at the last minute, and trust me. The devil is in the details that no one will like. Both Democrats and Republicans don’t’ want the public to see their outlandish spending habits that are nothing but buying votes for the next election. Both are guilty of ridiculous spending. I hope we do go off the Financial Cliff and let America learn and develop better spending habits. Trouble is, we keep electing the same people and expect different results.

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 7:54 p.m.

    The FACTS SHOW those so-called "wealthy" already pay the bulk of all Federal taxes collected.... everyone talks about a "fair share", but then simply ignore the nearly 50% in American that pay NO Federal income taxes at all- mep

    We've been over that.

    They pay no income tax because of the tax policies Reagan pushed in 1986 and Gingrich passed through congress in the 90s.

    Why are you suddenly mad about what the republicans pushed through just because a democrat is in office?

    But really, read the link I posted so you can learn what the marginal value of a dollar means too...

    The rich pay _less_ of their disposable income than anyone else does. Including those who pay NO income tax (because most of them pay plenty of OTHER taxes).

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 7:52 p.m.

    Who cares how much the rich HAVE. The rich are now paying twice their "share" to the government- M-Man

    No, they aren't.

    They're paying LESS than they have, ever, in your lifetime.

    Why do republicans not understand numbers?

    BTW, I _hate_ big government and think FDR about ruined this country.

    But I can also do math.

    I'd LOVE to see a LOT of government cuts. But we _also_ need increased revenues.

  • retiredindependentpopo Nov 30, 7:51 p.m.

    Rep. Lacy Clay, D-Mo., said, "If the people don't want it and they don't want to use it," she said, "why in the world are we even talking about changing it?" She said this about doing away with the dollar bill and changing to a dollar coin. Wonder why they did not use this logic with obama care and now with the obama economy about to go over the cliff. Do we use pelosi's logic, let it crash and we will find out what is in afterwards????

  • Rebelyell55 Nov 30, 7:51 p.m.

    I'm just shocked that there is so many that don't have a clue at to how our taxes are collected and spent.

  • batcave Nov 30, 7:47 p.m.

    You just earned a Gold Star for the dumbest comment of the day. Congrats!

    agreed it makes on sense, 2012? pick and choose. Georgia and West Va voted for Mondale, swing and a miss.

  • M-Man Nov 30, 7:47 p.m.

    junkmail5, you are a true big government lemming that looks at the economy as a fixed sized pie that has to be divied up in politically correct manner. Who cares how much the rich HAVE. The rich are now paying twice their "share" to the government in support of its ever increasing wasteful spending compared to before. How great of a share should "rich people" be forced to contribute compared to "non rich" to keep government going? 100% ??

  • storchheim Nov 30, 7:43 p.m.

    "I'm sorry, but if you're making $260,000, another $390 in tax isn't a huge burden." hp27

    Let's ignore the fact that no one except the person who earns the money has a say in whether it's needed or how it's used.

    Today the cutoff is $250k. You don't think it's going to remain $250k once it's passed, do you? Did you notice that in 2014, the penalty for no health ins is $95; in 2016, it's $695.

    This is what's so easy to lose sight of. Once any tax is passed, it will rise.

  • dsjackson Nov 30, 7:43 p.m.

    Why can't the Democrats concede that they can't cut one lousy cent from the debt without cutting spending ! Just adding taxation , even raising the top bracket , will not put a dent in a trillion dollar plus yearly debt . Freebies continue to drain our nation ( food stamps ,welfare , Medicaid , etc . ) . We cannot continue to foot the bill for around fifty percent of a nation not working and paying their own way .

  • mep Nov 30, 7:41 p.m.

    Junkmail5

    There is no finite amount of wealth (money) in American, or wealth available for you to earn. So stop with the class warfare and envy ploy. GROW UP. The FACTS SHOW those so-called "wealthy" already pay the bulk of all Federal taxes collected.... everyone talks about a "fair share", but then simply ignore the nearly 50% in American that pay NO Federal income taxes at all. So if you want to pay more taxes, go out there and EARN IT! Nothing nor no one is stopping you from being as fabulously wealthy as you desire. (except yourself that is) The meager $80 billion dollars the tax hike will generate is NOTHING compared to how much the govt will still borrow, ($ 800 billion) and even more trivial compared to how much we already owe ($16 trillion). Stop envying and start earning.... then lets see you beg for higher taxes once you become one of those "wealthy" folks. GOOD LUCK! LOL.

  • cheezchicken Nov 30, 7:40 p.m.

    What the heck is the Obama doing making gosh darned speeches right now???? He should have his suit-clad tail sitting in meetings trying to resolve this crisis. I just don't understand what the other half of this country had in mind, re-electing this individual. Well, you get what you asked for!

  • batcave Nov 30, 7:36 p.m.

    tax break for the uber rich

    Big deal. What happen to talk aobut debt ceiling reduction and job creation to increasing tax revenue? Right now all we here about is increased taxes on the rich.

    . The wise would simply reinvest rather than take it as profit and what US company couldn't use more investment?
    huh? Reinvest now ? Not hardly corporations aren't going to do anything untill they see how plays out. No need to reinvest untill their is at least a glimmer in the global economy. Short term , not going to happen.

  • retiredindependentpopo Nov 30, 7:35 p.m.

    When will you cry babies start owning this failed economy and stop blaming Bush, Romney, Bush, Reagan, Bush, Quayle, Bush, Nixon, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. Learn how to say: Bo-rack!!!!

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 7:29 p.m.

    You just earned a Gold Star for the dumbest comment of the day.- Ripcord

    Not really. Check this map.

    http://www.urbanfaith.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Slavery-vs-Election-Map560x500.jpg

    States that allowed slavery in 1859, states that had legal race segregation in 1950, and who voted republican in 2012.

    Notice how they're almost all identical?

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 7:27 p.m.

    The "uber rich" top 1% already pay 38% of all personal income taxes collected by the federal government. That's twice what it was when Reagan took office. Is that not enough for you?
    Ripcord

    No.

    Because for one, they also HAVE a much larger share of all the money than they did in 1981.

    While the poorest have about half the amount they had back then.

    Since you don't understand what the marginal value of the next dollar means, here's a good article to explain it to you, and explain why the rich pay the LEAST tax burden of anyone-

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-r-talbott/rich-pay-taxes_b_1873392.html

    In short, after needed expenses like food, shelter, etc are covered, the rich have MORE of their disposable income left (as a percentage) than anyone else, despite their higher tax rate.

    Because it's too low.

    Historically low in fact.

  • Ripcord Nov 30, 7:22 p.m.

    "The right don't want the 50s again unless they can also treat minorities and women like serfs again as well...." - Grand Union

    You just earned a Gold Star for the dumbest comment of the day. Congrats!

  • Grand Union Nov 30, 7:16 p.m.

    " Who knows, perhaps you were going to buy some stuff, or perhaps you were going to invest that money. "

    or you might just stuff it into a Caymans islands bank account like Romney did.....At least the Gov would spend most of it here....

  • Ripcord Nov 30, 7:14 p.m.

    "the uber rich" - Grand Union

    The "uber rich" top 1% already pay 38% of all personal income taxes collected by the federal government. That's twice what it was when Reagan took office. Is that not enough for you?

  • Grand Union Nov 30, 7:11 p.m.

    "I mean, the 50s were perfect, right? Let's use their tax rates!"

    The right don't want the 50s again unless they can also treat minorities and women like serfs again as well....

  • Ripcord Nov 30, 7:11 p.m.

    When Democrats get what they want and it sparks a new recession will it still be Bush's fault? Will Democrats cheer for their smaller paycheck?

  • Grand Union Nov 30, 7:08 p.m.

    ""Lets ride and enjoy the view as we crash. Elections have consequences and America is fixing to pay one heavy and well deserved price. Enjoy folks" RabbitDog"

    The Fiscal cliff was enacted long before the election and if the GOP in the house want to commit election suicide just to keep a tax break for the uber rich that they won't even notice the loss of, then thats almost worth it too.

  • Grand Union Nov 30, 7:06 p.m.

    "So you're ok taxing 90% of all income above 7.5 million?
    (plus all the other rates from the 1950s?)"

    If it can be shown that it would have little effect on GDP then yes I'm OK with it. If you are earning that much you are doing so because you like the work not because you need the work. The wise would simply reinvest rather than take it as profit and what US company couldn't use more investment?

  • Reformed Liberal Nov 30, 7:04 p.m.

    Who cares? It's 2012. Nothing is going to matter much anyways come Dec. 21st.

  • North Carolina Home Nov 30, 7:03 p.m.

    "Lets ride and enjoy the view as we crash. Elections have consequences and America is fixing to pay one heavy and well deserved price. Enjoy folks" RabbitDog

    Yes, we are.

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 7:01 p.m.

    Wait, my bad... the rate was 90% over 300k.

    Which is a little over 2 million now.

    So 90% tax on 2 million, that's ok, right?

    If not, why not?

    While we're at it- the rate back then on someone earning the inflation adjusted version of $250,000 (around 34k) was 50%.

    So I guess we can set the 250k income tax rate to 50% right?

    If not, why not?

    I mean, the 50s were perfect, right? Let's use their tax rates!

  • Grand Union Nov 30, 7:01 p.m.

    "THERE IS always a NEGATIVE impact when Government seizes MONEY."

    [sarcasm font on] yeah we would have won WW2 so much faster without the Gov. "siezing money".

    You do know you lost this argument in 1791?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

    The revolution was never about no taxation....just taxation without representation.

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 6:58 p.m.

    Nonsense.- whatelseisnew

    No, math.

    Which I trust the CBO on a _lot_ more than you.

    If you were earning a billion a year and say you are paying me 5 million in tax. Now even if I hit you up for an additional 500,000 so you pay 5.5 million don't try to tell me that there is no negative impact. perhaps you were going to buy some stuff-whatelseisnew

    Perhaps you were going to buy some stuff?

    Ok. So you'd just use the 994.5 million YOU STILL HAVE LEFT.

    Do you even read your own posts? Wow.

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 6:56 p.m.

    Ah the bogus percentage nonsense. Percentage is one part of the formula. the other part is the AMOUNT of money against which the percentage is applied. -whatelseisnew

    Yes. In the 1950s a 90% rate was applied against ALL income above 1 million dollars.

    That's about 7.5 million today.

    So you're ok taxing 90% of all income above 7.5 million?

    (plus all the other rates from the 1950s?)

    If not, why not?

    No nonsense, just a simple question.

    And BTW, no, we wouldn't have zero debt.

    The US has had a public debt for about 98% of its entire history going back to the late 1700s.

  • batcave Nov 30, 6:55 p.m.

    All this disgusting repubumpkin hype over a peril that is not going to happen.
    piene2
    WOW, you really don't get it , both sides are in agreement about the cliff, it was Obama's Ben Bernanke that brought the phrase back to modern times. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said if its not adressed , back to a recession and 9 percent unemployed by 2014. Obama is the one pushing for a quick resolve (this was caused by raising the debt ceiling. Yes , kind of a big deal. unbelievable what people don't get. If not a cliff a steep hill.

  • whatelseisnew Nov 30, 6:53 p.m.

    "No, it won't. When the CBO ran the numbers on each element of the cliff this tax increase was the only one that had nearly ZERO negative impact."

    Nonsense. If you were earning a billion a year and say you are paying me 5 million in tax. Now even if I hit you up for an additional 500,000 so you pay 5.5 million don't try to tell me that there is no negative impact. Who knows, perhaps you were going to buy some stuff, or perhaps you were going to invest that money. THERE IS always a NEGATIVE impact when Government seizes MONEY.

  • whatelseisnew Nov 30, 6:50 p.m.

    "Of course, the top marginal tax rate back then was 90%

    So I suppose you're all for doing that too, right?"

    Ah the bogus percentage nonsense. Percentage is one part of the formula. the other part is the AMOUNT of money against which the percentage is applied. This GOVERNMENT if it limited itself to what it is SUPPOSED to be doing, would have zero debt and instead of any talk about increasing taxes, we would have taxes being cut.
    I want the house to stand its ground and not agree to tax increase that does not come with the ratio of 10 dollars in cuts for every dollar in tax increases. Then they need to raise taxes on the bottom 50 percent. They need to be paying their fair share.

  • NCHighlander Nov 30, 6:45 p.m.

    Lets ride and enjoy the view as we crash. Elections have consequences and America is fixing to pay one heavy and well deserved price. Enjoy folks.

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 6:45 p.m.

    Taxing those so-called wealthy folks will bring in about $80 billion in "new" revenue per year. But cost the economy untold amounts in productivity and jobs.

    No, it won't. When the CBO ran the numbers on each element of the cliff this tax increase was the only one that had nearly ZERO negative impact.

    Because it has _nothing_ to do with businesses. It's a tax on personal income of the very rich.

    All this and he has taken the most vacations of any President in US history- virtualbiblestudy

    BLATANTLY false. Bush II took more than any president by a wide margin.

    He spent _32%_ of his entire 8 years on vacation.

    Obama is middle of the pack on vacation taking time.

  • 11of10 Nov 30, 6:44 p.m.

    Maybe Lawmakers should take a lesson from Lee Iacocca and offer to work for $1 a year until they get this mess fixed.

    I will bet it will not take anytime at all. This would include everyone in Washington upto and including the President. At least we would be saving those huge salaries while they are bickering to resolve the issues.

  • JKKC Nov 30, 6:41 p.m.

    Whatelseisnew, please do not belittle my children by comparing them to the abomination!

  • whatelseisnew Nov 30, 6:40 p.m.

    "Interesting that the same folks who decry Keynesian economic theory agree that if the government cuts spending too much, a recession will be the result... independent_thinker"

    I have no problem with cutting spending. IN fact that is the MAIN problem. It is a FAKE economy. It would not be an issue if all they spent was the amount of money that came in. However, they spend money they do not have so more and more money must go to debt servicing. Unless something is done about the debt we are in a death spiral financially. I just as soon they let the so-called fiscal cliff take place. Perhaps then enough people will wake up and insist that Presidents and the Congress stop spending money they do not have.

  • JKKC Nov 30, 6:38 p.m.

    Here's the part I think is funny, every time the government goes after them mean ole nasty rich folks, they make them richer! They broke the monopolies when the monopoly owners were in their latter years and made them obscenely rich. All they did was break their companies into smaller companies while maintaining their grip as majority owners. Government has done that several time and those that are not terribly smart economically have fallen at the feet of the government officials whose bank accounts are fully stuffed by their actions!!!

  • junkmail5 Nov 30, 6:37 p.m.

    And yet, at the end of WW2 when the govt cut millions of jobs, and sent millions of soldiers home.... the economy survived, AND we paid off our war debts -mep

    Of course, the top marginal tax rate back then was 90%

    So I suppose you're all for doing that too, right?

    You forgot something ..... members of congress were also voted back in by majorities in their respective districts so doesn't your argument FOR Obama's agenda, also hold true for those who who were re-elected to congress- PanthersFan45

    FYI- the democrats gains seats in both houses this election too... in fact they got _more_ votes for house seats too, it was only the republican redistricting that kept that from being a democratic majority in the house.

    The tax increase on the wealthy that Obama is proposing would run the government for 8.5 days. That isn't going to fix anything.- ripcord

    So remember, if your boss offers you a 10% raise- turn it down, it won't pay ALL your bills ALL year after all!

  • whatelseisnew Nov 30, 6:33 p.m.

    "Guess what folks. We will all go to bed on December thirtieth and we up on January first and nothing will have changed. All this disgusting repubumpkin hype over a peril that is not going to happen. Well I guess you need something to whine about do you not?"

    As is usual you are wrong on multiple counts. The Tax cuts across the board will expire. Effective January 1st the rates return to Clinton era rates for EVERYBODY. Second there are all the automatic cuts. That part is actually a plus because it forces something to happen that Obama won't do and Congress won't do. It cuts spending. Of course you as usual just want to claim this is coming from the Republicans (another of your delusions). It is not. The love of your life Obama told some half truths again where he talked about the tax rates going up. So what happened to COMPROMISE and working with Republicans he lied about pre-election. Apparently that had a short shelf life. He is back to my way or the highway. He is a child.

  • piene2 Nov 30, 6:26 p.m.

    Guess what folks. We will all go to bed on December thirtieth and we up on January first and nothing will have changed. All this disgusting repubumpkin hype over a peril that is not going to happen. Well I guess you need something to whine about do you not?

  • mmtlash Nov 30, 6:26 p.m.

    we all know there will be some last minute compromise like what happens every year

  • retiredindependentpopo Nov 30, 6:21 p.m.

    If the Republicans give in and pass ANY tax increases with out cuts in wasteful spending, this country will forever more be run by the socialists. I will not vote for another spineless Republican again.

  • mep Nov 30, 6:20 p.m.

    Interesting that the same folks who decry Keynesian economic theory agree that if the government cuts spending too much, a recession will be the result...
    independent_thinker

    And yet, at the end of WW2 when the govt cut millions of jobs, and sent millions of soldiers home.... the economy survived, AND we paid off our war debts. Something we should consider doing now.

  • mep Nov 30, 6:18 p.m.

    aetius476
    NO DOUBT ABOUT IT..... Obama has not even gotten us over the fiscal cliff yet, and he is already spending the "new" revenue.
    If the taxes go up on the so-called "wealthy" it may generate about $80 billion... and even though the money is not even coming in, Obama is promising to spend $50 billion on another "stimulus". You gotta hand it to him.... he is audacious. (with our money that is)

  • PanthersFan45 Nov 30, 6:17 p.m.

    "President Obama won the election with the promise to increase taxes on those making over 250K so most Americans are in agreement. It is time to get something done and why Congress can not act and sign the bill is just nonsensical." - free2bme

    You forgot something ..... members of congress were also voted back in by majorities in their respective districts so doesn't your argument FOR Obama's agenda, also hold true for those who who were re-elected to congress ? ..... We still have divided government and I see a good chance the Fiscal Cliff will happen. I think it gives both sides a good excuse to blame the other .... the result will be the tough choices actually happening that NEED to happen.

  • souljp1 Nov 30, 6:15 p.m.

    You all hate him(pRESIDENT Obama) with all the hateful air you breath but let's face it he still won.. :-) Laughing all the way to the White House .. So when are you haters moving ? lol

  • retiredindependentpopo Nov 30, 6:11 p.m.

    Let this thing CRASH. Reid refuses to submit a budget out of the Senate and obama talks smoke and mirrors. It's obama and Reid's economy now.

  • souljp1 Nov 30, 6:09 p.m.

    Yeah yeah yeah you Repubs never give up do you? completely out of touch.Wish you all could have your own statehood and lets see who does the best.. Why do all the RED states talk about less government and no taxes but yet are the main states taking for assistance.. always talking out both sides of your mouth.

  • Ripcord Nov 30, 5:58 p.m.

    "Obama is the best president this country has ever had. Thank you Obama." - Jimmytwotimes

    Setting the bar a bit low, aren't you?

Oldest First