Bush Tax cuts for the rich

[Logan]

Why does everyone seem to think the expiration for the tax cuts for the rich is a bad thing?
My company employs about 70,000 people and most of us have taken pay cuts while the managers continue with there raises and record bonuses. Talk about a redistribution of wealth.
Since the rich are getting richer they have more money and why not let the tax breaks expire since the money they make is coming from the middle class?

Remember, the increase in tax is ONLY on what is made above $250,000. With a tax increase of 3% someone who makes $350,000 a year will pay an extra $3000 in tax.

It is not the rich that has suffered through the recession yet the policies and the decisions of the Government, Wall Street and companies like mine that are made by the rich is a leading contributor of the recession in this country.

Logan

[HHM]

Some of the resistance is philosophical. It is a pretty lousy argument to say that because the rich "can" pay more, that they "should" pay more. Not everyone believes that forced redistribution of wealth is a good thing or is consistent with the value of fairness.

Also, for fairness, the so called bush tax cuts encompass more than just that little bit you talk about, it also has a lot to do with business and corporate taxes. The recession wasn't caused by tax cuts, the recession was caused by imploding companies. Also, I am hard pressed to think of any economist that would think it is a good idea to raise taxes when we have barely emerged (if we even have emerged) from a recession that increases the cost of doing business.

[Logan]

Some of the resistance is philosophical. It is a pretty lousy argument to say that because the rich "can" pay more, that they "should" pay more. Not everyone believes that forced redistribution of wealth is a good thing or is consistent with the value of fairness.

I agree but we all pay more as we make more. Where should it stop? I don't know but read this article...the rich managers keep making money but won't hire the people without jobs...

Companies hold record $837B in cash, yet won't hire workers

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/2010-07-28-cashcows28_ST_N.htm

[Dougie011]

I think everyone is over taxed. Making taxes higher on a few doesn't help me pay my taxes. Besides, the "rich" are the ones that offer people their jobs. I don't think that raising taxes on anyone is good thing. Over spending is the problem and the government needs to fix that. If they continue to overspend, no amount of tax increases will help IMHO.

[sofarsogood2]

The recession was caused by the greed and poor decisions of Gov't. Officials/ Regulatory Agencies/ Bank & Finance/ Wall Street folks who have sucked money away from the regular guy in many ways, and they continue to do so. They have gotten richer, we (middle class) have gotten poorer.

They trashed our 401K's and now are looking to take away Social Security. It's not an "entitlement" program. We pay for it. It's an insurance policy for our Golden *choke* years. If they want to take it away, then I want all my money back, plus interest.

I have no problem paying more taxes, a higher percentage, than the guy that makes less than me. It still leaves me with more in my pocket than he has. Why do the rich have such a problem with that? It's perfectly fair.

However, just changing the tax code isn't going to stop them from trying to milk us dry. I truly believe their goal is to have us living like some third world country because they think that's all we peons deserve. If that level of living is good for those in India, or whatever country you want to choose, why shouldn't it be good for Americans? (their thinking, not mine)

What we need are ideas to fight back. They have infiltrated our government and influence legislation. The only way to fight back is to hit them in the pocketbook.

My personal battle with them will be to not allow them to make money off me.
I will avoid borrowing - just use enough to maintain a decent credit rating for emergency purposes. Credit Unions will get my business for those needs.

I will save my money, and when I spend it, it will be to benefit me and my family only- no percentage going to the banks. Cash is King.

I will teach my children not to be sucked into the usury system, how to save, and how to manage a small credit line to their benefit.

I will teach my children to use their vote wisely, research the candidates- not just politicians, but also Judges and other elected officials. Ignore their words and flowery speeches. Look at their campaign donations- (ie. who is buying them?) Look at their past actions and voting record. Make an informed decision.

The middle class need to pull together and boycott companies that mistreat employees and award insane bonuses to their upper management while they lay off workers. How do they live with themselves? Laying off some poor schmuck from the trenches to enhance their already bloated bank account. How much money does a person need-seriously? Their mindset is completely different than most people. No compassion, no empathy- just an insatiable desire for more money. I think it's an inbred disease-like hip dysplasia in purebred dogs.

We need state run banks like North Dakota that invest in the local communities, not some foreign entity. That way, the money we save in the institution is used to better the economy in our communities.

I believe we have the numbers to make a difference, but we need a leader, a movement, to pull us together. "Move-Your-Money was a start, but we need to do more.

We have some brilliant people on this forum- any takers?

[Logan]

I think everyone is over taxed. Making taxes higher on a few doesn't help me pay my taxes. Besides, the "rich" are the ones that offer people their jobs. I don't think that raising taxes on anyone is good thing. Over spending is the problem and the government needs to fix that. If they continue to overspend, no amount of tax increases will help IMHO.

I agree but the Bush tax cuts came as government spending increased by 41%. The 90's were great and there were higher taxes. We're in a recession after the tax cuts.

[Dougie011]

I agree but the Bush tax cuts came as government spending increased by 41%. The 90's were great and there were higher taxes. We're in a recession after the tax cuts.

Don't get me wrong. I do think everyone is overtaxed, but the government has to cut spending. There is so much waste in government it is ridiculous. BOTH the republicans and democrats are unwilling to spend less, balance the budget and reduce the deficit.

[helpmeout]

Don't get me wrong. I do think everyone is overtaxed, but the government has to cut spending. There is so much waste in government it is ridiculous. BOTH the republicans and democrats are unwilling to spend less, balance the budget and reduce the deficit.

Part of reducing the deficit and debt would be to raise taxes. And one easy way to do that is to let Bush's giveaway to his rich friends expire.

[Dougie011]

Part of reducing the deficit and debt would be to raise taxes. And one easy way to do that is to let Bush's giveaway to his rich friends expire.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

[justbroke]

Part of reducing the deficit and debt would be to raise taxes. And one easy way to do that is to let Bush's giveaway to his rich friends expire.

Totally disagree. The best way to reduce deficits... is to curtail spending. If you raise taxes, you decrease the number of jobs created or maintained, and your tax base decreases.

I'm in the top 5% of tax payers, and yes, we do pay more than 60% of the entire tax revenues collected. The bottom 50% actually get money they didn't pay in. It's simply a redistribution of wealth, and if you keep doing this, the truly wealthy will leave and take their money with them.

[backtoschool]

Totally disagree. The best way to reduce deficits... is to curtail spending. If you raise taxes, you decrease the number of jobs created or maintained, and your tax base decreases.

I'm in the top 5% of tax payers, and yes, we do pay more than 60% of the entire tax revenues collected. The bottom 50% actually get money they didn't pay in. It's simply a redistribution of wealth, and if you keep doing this, the truly wealthy will leave and take their money with them.

I agree with you justbroke that taxes should not be raised on the rich at this point. The rich create jobs and invest in companies that use the capital raised to grow, which in turn creates jobs, etc.... blah blah blah,

But....

Cutting spending when we are not out of the woods on the recession/depression we are in, will only give us a double dip recession/depression and will cause more problems. Perhaps we can redistribute our spending and cut back on the war(s) and add that to social programs, but cutting entitlement programs, unemployment, social services, and make-work projects will not solve anything in relation to the deficit in the short or even the mid term (it would be a drop in the bucket of our deficit) and could cause economic retrenchment that will lead to a double-dip recession.

[justbroke]

I wish I had the answers.

[helpmeout]

Totally disagree. The best way to reduce deficits... is to curtail spending. If you raise taxes, you decrease the number of jobs created or maintained, and your tax base decreases.

Curtailing spending AND bringing in more revenue from taxes to pay down the debt is the only way to put any type of dent in it.

And your argument doesn't hold water considering how well we did under Clinton with his tax increase. Simply doesn' hold water at all.

[justbroke]

And your argument doesn't hold water considering how well we did under Clinton with his tax increase. Simply doesn' hold water at all.

Clinton did so during the DOT COM boom. Tax revenues were awesome, just like they were in the years preceding this boom. Also, if you recall, they passed the balanced budget act and didn't have this crazy spending.

I'm not arguing... ask an economist.

[Dougie011]

I think you two will have to agree to disagree also.

Clinton did so during the DOT COM boom. Tax revenues were awesome, just like they were in the years preceding this boom. Also, if you recall, they passed the balanced budget act and didn't have this crazy spending.

I'm not arguing... ask an economist.