Posted on 12/08/2012 6:55:13 PM PST by Vinylly
From what I read, most of the very rich are liberal d'RAT's. Most of the politicians in Congress and Senate are multimillionaires. They out number Republicans by large numbers. Even the president is a multi-millionaire. Bill Gates, George Soros, and all those whacky movie-queens are millionaires. Nancy Polcat, Harry Inbreed are millionaires. Donald Trump and Mitt Romney are not liberal d'RAT's but they are a small minority. So, when all these liberal d'RAT's scream, 'Hate the Filthy Rich', all they are doing is screaming, 'Hate our Filthy Butts'. Why not just let them screw themselves? Most Republicans are small property and business owners trying to earn a living and not filthy rich.
Yeah. And they are organized and cold-blooded on how they want to avoid those taxes, no penny is left to chance. The scum even arranged to avoid having to pay Massachusetts taxes on his yacht by arranging to register it in Rhode Island instead of Massachusetts. (you can read about it here)
Amazing. Liberals have such gall...like Michelle Obama making a stink about what other people eat and drink while the melted butter from her lobster dribbles down her chin.
I think Ann Coulter had it right, when years ago she said in one of her books something along the line that Liberals take a perverse joy in lying and hypocrisy, almost competing laughingly with each other to see who can get away with more.
cut welfare payments 20%. tax the poor they don’t pay their fair share.
My daughter and I went to the ballet tonight and the program listed sponsors. There were large, well-known corporations as well as local businesses and individuals. The “rich” do a lot of great work with the arts and charities. I know a lot is tax-deductible but not all. If the “rich” have to pay higher taxes, won’t that cut into the charitable giving and sponsorship of all sorts of programs? I much rather the “rich” support things than the government.
“Now explain where the democrats get their money.”
From the same place that the Republicans get their money. The dims don’t want to anger Wall Street, either.
“taunting the Rats to do the same, which they didn’t.”
From Wall Street. The dims don’t want to anger Wall Street, either
Sadly, Hollywood and Greenwich CT losers will avoid taxes and still vote leftist. That’s how statism works.
Meanwhile, the guy or gal who busted their butt to build the restaurant chain or machine shop with 50 employees, who is also considered “rich,” will wind up paying.
Mind you, if it was up to me, I’d tax all “entertainment” earnings over 5 million a year at 100%.
Since Rosie and Oprah and Katy Perry et al wanted Zero. . . they can pay for him.
But it won’t happen. . .
all good points abut “the rich” living off “unearned income” from their investments, such as dividends
Buffet I believe has set himself up to be paid in dividends, and takes only a token salary - to reduce his income taxes. The Kennedys live off family trusts established to manage their inherited wealth and reduce their taxes. John Edwards established a sub-chapter S corporation to shelter his wealth, and Rahm Emmanuel establishd his family as a nnprofit and the family home as its headquarters so he and wife (the only “emploees”) could write off expenses and shelter wealth
With the right tax lawyers, a lot of people could become “richer”. Paying “income” taxes is for little people
However before conservatives join the pack of baying hounds determined to run down “the rich” who live off “passive” investments, remember that many retired folks who managed to save and invest over a lifetime, putting momey aside onlu after it was already taxed, also depend on investment income when they are no longer able to work. They will also be hunted down as “rich” under any govt laws aggressively targeting investment income
None of the people you mentioned will be paying the increased rates. They will have shelters and loopholes and special deductions and tax credits.
I’d get behind that.
The filthy rich don’t have taxable incomes that high. They’re smarter than that. The tax increase for the “rich” will hit small business more than anything and be a drag on an already faltering economy.
The rich keep their loop holes and create more to protect their wealth and their power promoters - liberal media, liberal entertainment, Global corporations (who enjoy the benefits of screwing America in friendly US trade policy), foundations and institutions.
The tax raises go to cap the income of the middle class who can only muster a house loan write off or retirement saving, if they are lucky. The tax rates capture the middle class’ funds they would use for investment and wealth creation. Notice that the only loophole the elite -on both sides of the aisle - are interested in deleting is the mortgage deduction. Liberals want to not only end retirement savings deductions, they want to grab all the retirement savings of people and redistribute it “fairly.”
See? So if you want to raise the income tax on the “rich” you need to cut out the loop holes they have to protect their wealth. That is never going to happen. If you closed two, they would purchase three next election. They also want to tax the interest peple planned for retirement.
If “taxes on the rich” liberals who are ruining this culture and nation would really happen, I’d be all for it just to feed them back full measure of their “cause.” I’d tax ‘em into my shed. I’d rent it cheap.
It’s been said before, but it bears repeating: the “rich” - no matter HOW we define them - already pay FAR MORE than their share of the national expense.
And that “national expense” is, for the most part, government officials attempting to purchase the votes of the indigent with cash.
This is not Democracy.
This is the purchase of government jobs at wholesale prices, and it’s been going on for more than a century, when corrupt and mercenary characters first learned they could generate personal fortunes at public expense by involving themselves in government.
This whole “tax the rich” rhetoric is simply a Marxist attempt to channel discussion into old, familiar - and utterly bogus - channels.
What we need, more than anything else, is a renewal of something on the order of, “Let’s cut govermnent expenses and return to fiscal responsibility.”
Not a big favorite in Washington, alas, where legislation is generally all about fattening the Fat Cats
I think post #39 explains it pretty well.
They may not be doing anything illegal or unethical, but there are certain parts of the tax code that make no sense to me, like large companies that are able to shelter cash offshore. I understand that our corporate tax is too high, and that’s why they do it, so why don’t lawmakers lower the corporate tax so they will keep that money here? Maybe the big corporations like it that way and they give enough money to both Republicans and Democrats to keep it that way?
http://www.businessinsider.com/tax-loophole-congress-google-apple-microsoft-2012-12
You are buying the premise that the government needs more money. They already take over 23% of the GNP. And that’s just the federal govt. Add in all the state taxes and you get around 30% of GNP that runs government at all levels. ...... And they want more. Cave to the notion that “it is only the rich people,” and eventually the government will get more from you as well.... and more and more. They won’t stop until the people make them stop.
For some reason, the voters understood that today yes the wealthy would pay the income tax, but eventually the threshold for "wealthy" would get them, too.
I've never understood the American voter. Sometimes smart, mostly stupid. But upon occasion they do the right thing.
Disclaimer: California voters ALWAYS do the wrong thing. At least over the past 30 years.
It has been revealed that the person with an income of $60,000 has less disposable income than someone on unemployment. It pays to stay unemployed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.