PLAYER57832 wrote: Night Strike wrote:
Nola_Lifer wrote:Let say all Obama wants to do is take money for the wealthiest people. That would be the people at the top, the 1%ers. If he does do this and gives take breaks to lower and middle class people, wouldn't that mean more money for you, PS? I am assuming your not a kabillionaire. Wouldn't you want more money? I am saying this as someone who probably won't vote for Obama so don't but this "O your a liberal" bullshit on me.
Because some people realize it's wrong to use the government to take money from someone else just so they can give some of it to you. For all the accusations of greed thrown at those who don't want higher taxes on "the rich", you have just precisely pointed out where the real greed in our society lies that the media never questions.
Its not the middle class failing to pay their share that put us in debt, sorry.. it very much is the wealthy -- corporate discounts, bank bail outs.
And yet conservatives and libertarians oppose those things and
the government mandates that forced banks to provide more and more riskier loans while promising the full backing of those toxic assets by the government. The government forced banks to up their toxic loan percentage to 10% from 1%, so of course there was going to be a horrible fallout coming. When some Republicans (even Bush) tried to warn that the housing bubble was going to collapse, it was the Democrats like Barney Frank who refused to listen to those calls of reform and swore that the housing market was sound. But no, we have to get the government even more involved in how the private sector works.
PLAYER57832 wrote:The reason our government has had to expand so much is to protect people from the many abuses by corporations... Even so, they were not ENOUGH to prevent BP, Massey Energy, Madoff or many other debacles. THEY are why we need to increase taxes. And it is far more correct that the wealthy, who have money, pay those additional amounts than it is to cut school lunches, food for the elderly, healthcare for the poor and education funding.
How do the wealthy have enough money to pay for all those things? You can have a 100% tax on income over $1 million and not have enough money to run the government for 1 month (assuming everyone keeps their pay rates exactly where they are). We have a spending
problem, not a taxation problem. We have 47% of the population who does not pay any federal income taxes. Why can't they pay at least 1% instead of demanding more money from the other half of the country? THAT is the true us vs them that is present in the country today: those who are making money and paying taxes and those who demand the government give them more handouts.
By the way, none of those things listed in your last sentence are jobs the federal government is supposed to be doing anyway, so that would be a large chunk of spending to cut.