Tax hike on the rich would impact just 3% of taxpayers

[EV_Ares]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- As the government looks for ways to climb out of its massive hole of debt, all eyes are on the rich.
President Obama and many of his fellow Democrats continue to call for higher taxes on the wealthy. And, according to results of a CNN/ORC International Poll released Wednesday, many Americans agree that it's the only way the country can dig itself out of its current economic mess.

Link: http://cnnmon.ie/nmZGoL

[raccoon]

1. But how rich are the 3%? Hiking their taxes could make a helluva difference. nt

[dkf]

5. $700 billion of $3.6 trillion would get paid if the Bush cuts expired just for $250,000+

Compared to the rising expected deficit that isn't much, 10% of the 10 year estimate maybe?

The numbers don't work.

[Angry Dragon]

6. It seems that you and others forget a very important

part of the equation

When the government brings that money in it spends it.
It is used for social programs
that means it spends it on people
those people either spend it themselves or it is paid to providers
who them spend it
It is spent for food, rent, clothes, all kinds of things
that is then spent for more hires because of demand
that $70 billion a year might be spent 6-7 times before
it ends up in a rich persons pocket
6 times $70 billion is $420 billion - a lot of that is wages or profit
which itself is taxable so the tax base increases

more money in the pipeline increases the tax base
increases demand leads to need to hire
so the only logical conclusion is that by taxing the rich leads to job creation
so that is the only way the rich are the job creators

[Pacifist Patriot]

9. I swear I'm not stalking you today.

Just wanted to give this response a huge thumbs up. Too many people are forgetting a $1 doesn't always equal $1.

And it's not just social programs. If the money went to investing in infrastructure...job creation.

[Angry Dragon]

12. Are you sure?? .........

You may be developing a Dragon fetish


A positive comment is never deemed stalking


:hi: :hi: :hi:

[Pacifist Patriot]

14. I do have a fondness for the sparkly jewel-toned type of dragons.

If you tell me you fit that profile I may swoon.

[Angry Dragon]

16. I myself am a dark blue

Dragons are hard to see and usually can only be seen when you least expect them
much like love ........

[Fantastic Anarchist]

11. Beautifully said. n/t

[dkf]

13. Not unless we intend to spend an additional $700 billion because we get the taxes.

That money is scheduled to be spent whether we get the funds through taxes or bond sales.

[Angry Dragon]

15. How can it be scheduled to be spent when it is not going to be

in the bank at least until 2013

Congress can not think past today

[dkf]

17. We have projections for the next 75 years.

It assumes current law carries forward with adjustments for growth. Our taking in extra taxes doesn't affect spending except what we save in interest costs because what we don't collect through taxes we will get through bond sales ergo our need to constantly raise the debt ceiling.

[Angry Dragon]

18. Projections are just maybes

Here is a better idea
Eliminate bush tax cuts for the people with adjusted gross income over $250,000 on 12/31/2011
Raise taxes on these people to 70% on anyone making $50 million
Progressive tax on capital gains tied to higher adjusted income
Close corporate tax loopholes
Stop oil and gas subsidies (corporate welfare)

[dkf]

19. Won't pass. The only way to raise taxes is get rid of the Bush tax cuts.

There....done.

[truedelphi]

22. Well one big part of the puzzle is that many corporations don't pay a red cent.

I mean, look at how little the oil companies in the Gulf of Mexico pay to lease the waters they troll for oil in.

And then look at the fact that many oil companies don't pay more than a token amount, while others pay nothing.

If we really need to offset the deficit, then we need to start charging real monies for resources offered up to the biggest and the wealthiest of the corporations.

Look at how Michigan has handed over aquifers worth millions to the Nestle corporation and others. No one seems to even know who approved of the deal, but the water is being drained out of the MI aquifers, put in plastic bottles, and then sold to consumers for $ 1.19 and up per 16 oz bottle.

Yet Michigan faces the worst of deficits. What is going on - is every other legislator in this nation on the take?

[Chorophyll]

2. It would "impact" the other 97% for the better

if they were made to pay. We're not supposed to be an oligarchy here.

[Johonny]

8. +1

[HughBeaumont]

3. It's not about how few there are. It's about how much wealth and income they control.

:think:

[LonePirate]

4. We need to increase taxes on corporations, too. If they will not create jobs with all of that cash

We should tax them so that the government can create jobs. It's their patriotic duty to help the economy so since they refuse to do so, taxation should be the next solution.

[Pacifist Patriot]

10. I like the idea of a corporate tax direct to invest in public infrastructure, but that's just me.

I don't expect it to be a popular idea.

[Iggo]

7. Great! Let's do it. (n/t)

[Ignis]

20. K&R

It's sad that those 3% are so disproportionately represented by our elected officials.

[Waiting For Everyman]

21. It's long overdue. Lots of the deficit came from the tax cuts they shouldn't have got.

There's no way everybody else should be paying for that.

Cough it up, Fraudsters.