Raise Taxes on the Rich

Posted on 08/03/2010 at 4:24 pm by Bob Cesca

Americans overwhelmingly support raising taxes on the rich. Payroll taxes. To pay for Social Security. Americans are totally correct on this.

Social-Security-System.gif

Of course the Republicans and the Very Serious villagers would have you believe that Americans hate taxes and would prefer to save Social Security by investing it in the super excellent stock market.

This entry was posted in Economy and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://tarackian.deviantart.com J M Ashby

    I dont think this is a battle that Republicans can win. It didnt work even when Bush was in office.I guess complaining about spending sounds good in a campaign commerical, even if that spending is something which people depend on.

  • roxsteady

    Ugh! This is off topic but, I just watched a segment on Chris Matthews with Doug Wilder and then John Heilman. First, Wilder who I find to be a complete ass hole stated that Obama should dump Biden and make Hillary his VP. Then, Heilman comes on and says the same thing. Then, both Matthews and Heilman state that Hillary is going to run in 2016. Both admit that she and her people say she’s not going to run but, they both said that no one believes her. Clearly they’ve both forgotten that those of us who didn’t vote for her before STILL WOULDN’T VOTE FOR HER AGAIN. Then they also state that he should make her his VP before 2012 because she’s good with white voters in many of the states that don’t favor Obama like New York and Illinois? Clearly they’ve also forgotten how toxic she was during her own run in many states where Biden is more favored. I’m so sick of these 2 ass holes. Matthews also told Heilman that his book Game Change is the best political book out there and how even Nancy Regan told him how much she loved it. As if that isn’t proof of just how fucked up and gossipy the book actually was. Heilman actually gushed about how honered he was to hear that and how much he loved Nancy Regan. I just threw up in my mouth!

  • roxsteady

    By the way, Wilder actually wrote his nonsense in an op ed in the politico. This just proves how out of touch he is with Democrats. We don’t read that GOP propaganda sheet and if he was part of the 21st century he’d know that. Wilder should enjoy his retirement and stay the hell out of politics. He clealy has no clue about the Democratic party. He kept talking about how high Hillary’s poll numbers are. He like the rest of the villagers don’t seem to get it. Her numbers are high because she’s not doing a damn thing to affect domestic policy right now. She’s out of sight and out of our minds. He work as Secretary of State not withstanding, she’s still every bit as toxic as she was when she told her bullshit Bosnia story and when she dragged out her concession that she’s lost the primary with her whole 50 million glass ceiling garbage. The only people who still have a hard on for her are the media and those crazy PUMA bitches!

  • Allen Frederick

    Wow! Shocker!!You mean Americans want to …- tax the rich on all their wage income?- limit the SS benefits the rich receive?Again … WOW!! Shocker!!You mean Americans don’t want to …- tax the non-rich any further?- reduce benefits for early retirement?- increase the eligibility age?Again … WOW!! Shocker!!In other words, most Americans want the wealthy to futher subsidize their retirement, while denying benefits to those same people. All the while keeping the eligibility rules as they are now.Again … WOW!! Shocker!!

  • roxsteady

    It is good to see that most Americans aren’t nearly as stupid as the GOP thinks they are. It does give me hope that there could be a November surprise for the media and the Republicans. Maybe, just maybe they’ll be the one’s to get their asses handed to them. I’m going to do my part that’s for sure!

  • Pixie

    OMFG, allen – you are such a libercon or some such hybrid, aren’t you? You’re not a progressive, a liberal OR a member of the Democratic party, are you?What do you want? Do you want to have SS in the stock market? Do you want to destroy it (and what happens to all of MY money that I’ve been putting in all these years???)?And hell yeah, tax the rich or at least kill the loopholes that allow them and corporations to avoid paying any taxes or taking in civic responsibility at all. Then maybe my precarious position in the middle-class will be slightly more secure vs. what I feel might be a rapid drop into poverty if people like you had their way. The way it’s going now, if I can get a job when this one ends this month, maybe I can hope for working until I drop dead because some people seem hell-bent on destroying all of the money I’ve paid into the system.

  • caribbeanobserver

    @roxsteadyIf you go back and check it out the media are always wrong. Remember the primaries and the debates where the media would say who won and the pubic would say something copletely different. And, don’t forget CNN’s John King and his magicboard,twisting it every which way to try and make Hilary win even though reality was in his face. This always keeps me sane, plus as my grandmother used to say. ‘Where did you get that story…check the source.’!!The media just need to stir up controversy and spin their own hype because they ain’t got nothing better to do AND the fact they have to feed the public every day some fodder for their shows. And why, pray tell, not fodder with exagerrations, propaganda and distortion. Eh?

  • http://tarackian.deviantart.com J M Ashby

    Careful Allen, your spoiled brat free-market libertarian roots are showing.

  • http://kaysthinkingcap.blogspot.com Kay Dennison

    As always, you are correct, Russ!!! However, in today’s world isn’t you aren’t ‘in’!!! “Common Sense” is just a book by that rabble rouser, Tom Paine, and not valid today — just ask those ‘experts’ at Faux News.Sigh.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole473

    pixie—>>>OMFG, allen – you are such a libercon or some such hybrid, aren’t you? You’re not a progressive, a liberal OR a member of the Democratic party, are you?Nailed it. I don’t know what the moron thinks he is, but he is no liberal/progressive. Quite the opposite, IMO.

  • Erika Frensley

    In other words, most Americans want the wealthy to futher subsidize their retirement, while denying benefits to those same people. All the while keeping the eligibility rules as they are now.

    Why thank you for putting so plainly what I’d be thinking about the current class of rich and rich wannabes: They want to get out of the system at least and more than they put in. They don’t care about contributing to society as a whole – if they don’t get every penny of that money that they paid (after clinging to every deduction and tax dodge they could) then they don’t want society on the whole to get anything extra (or even anything) from them.The rich can use all the tax loopholes that the poor and middle class cannot, so the rich do not pay their percentage of taxes that we do. Reminder – taxes are based on AGI (Adjusted Gross Income) and the loopholes and deductions that the rich take will greatly lower their AGI. Thus they’re not paying taxes on their entire income but on their AGI which could be cut down to a lower tax bracket.Again, thank you Allen, you made this so clear to me how spoiled and greedy the rich are, and how they do not want to perform any part of their civic duty that does not directly benefit them.

  • josephS

    Americans overwhelmingly support taxing the “rich” – a term whose defininition of who is rich based on income is in free fall. Since about 2008, it’s been $250,000/yr – a convenient political number since most people don’t make that much. It’s a great number to use if you want to ratchet up the Resent-o-meter in your base.What’s the latest bottom figure for someone who’s rich, $150K? If you’re not “rich” yet, just wait a few years.

  • Erika Frensley 
    From the US Census Bureau (2005)Income Range: $100,000 or more (15.73%)$100,000 to $149,999:# Households in thousands and %: 11,194 9.89%$150,000 to $199,999# Households in thousands and %: 3,595 3.17%$200,000 to $249,999# Households in thousands and %: 1,325 1.17%$250,000 and above# Households in thousands and %: 1,699 1.50%

    Considering that 1.50% of the population has a household income of more than 250K, I think it’s pretty safe to set the level of rich at that level. Every discussion and proposal I’ve seen uses the 250K as the base figure.Remember, in the 250K figure, money from jobs, dividends and interest received from stocks and retirement plans, and income from social security are counted. Capital gains from the sale of stocks or properties are not counted, nor are inheritances and insurance settlements (Info from Census Long Form Income Definition).

  • likala

    I believe John McCain set the bottom figure at $5 million or some ridiculous number like that. But then again we’d be talking about John “I never called myself a maverick” McCain.I’d certainly consider myself rich if I were to ever come close to $250,000 per year. One can always dream.