REPORT: 23 straight polls find Americans overwhelmingly want to raise taxes to pay down debt

[Guest Phailadelphia]

http://www.businessinsider.com/23-polls-say-people-support-higher-taxes-to-reduce-the-deficit-2011-8?utm_source=twbutton&utm_medium=social&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=politics-contributor

 

 

I'm just sayin...

[Shotgun 442]

I'm sure most of them are voting for tax increases on the rich, something that won't happen. If the government raises taxes it'll be on the poor and middle class like it always is.

 

 

Here's an interesting read written by one of the richest people in the world, saying why they should raise taxes on the rich.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1&ref=warrenebuffett

[RazorStar 4,025]

Nothing is stopping people like Warren Buffett from giving more to the government... They just don't want to unless it's forced upon them.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Nothing is stopping people like Warren Buffett from giving more to the government... They just don't want to unless it's forced upon them.

 

Yup. They pay their tax people good money to save them millions of dollars by working the tax code.

[Shotgun 442]

Nothing is stopping people like Warren Buffett from giving more to the government... They just don't want to unless it's forced upon them.

 

 

This comment is just dumb. The whole point of his article is about raising taxes on the rich so they would be forced to pay more. All of them. You can't seriously expect every businessman in America to just give away money for no reason, and just a few doing it won't make that much of a difference in the end considering how much money the country spends every second.

[WindyCitySports 407]

It's a complicated issue. It only makes sense that if you want to get rid of the debt as fast as possible you should both raise taxes and cut spending. However, I believe it will further damage the economy if we raise taxes; much more than spending cuts would.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

It's a complicated issue. It only makes sense that if you want to get rid of the debt as fast as possible you should both raise taxes and cut spending. However, I believe it will further damage the economy if we raise taxes; much more than spending cuts would.

 

In what way?

I don't know where people get this idea that tax hikes hurt business growth. Taxes used to be ridiculously high in the early-mid 1900s but America underwent one of its biggest economic booms during that period.

 

Reagan appears to be the last GOP president who realized this.

 

Edit: At least you admitted tax hikes increase revenue.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Phailadelphia

[RazorStar 4,025]

I'm saying Buffett is a hypocrite.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I'm saying Buffett is a hypocrite.

 

HEY YOU... Stop being a non-sheep! Warren Buffet is an angel!

 

It doesn't matter that he sleeps on bricks of gold, or that his net worth is over 50 billion....

 

No... You aren't listening to what he is saying!

[Shotgun 442]

How the hell does that make him a hypocrite? All he's saying is the excuse that higher taxes on rich people would harm job creation and investing is incorrect and that the government would be better of taxing higher income individuals. Just because he doesn't randomly give away his money to the government of his own choice doesn't make him a hypocrite. If he said all this and then refused to pay the higher taxes THEN he would be a hypocrite. If the taxes were raised and he suddenly started complaining about it THEN he would be a hypocrite. I'm not so sure you know what hypocrisy even means.

 

 

HEY YOU... Stop being a non-sheep! Warren Buffet is an angel!

 

It doesn't matter that he sleeps on bricks of gold, or that his net worth is over 50 billion....

 

No... You aren't listening to what he is saying!

 

wat

Edited August 16, 2011 by Shotgun

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

How the hell does that make him a hypocrite? All he's saying is the excuse that higher taxes on rich people would harm job creation and investing is incorrect and that the government would be better of taxing higher income individuals. Just because he doesn't randomly give away his money to the government of his own choice doesn't make him a hypocrite. If he said all this and then refused to pay the higher taxes THEN he would be a hypocrite. If the taxes were raised and he suddenly started complaining about it THEN he would be a hypocrite. I'm not so sure you know what hypocrisy even means.

 

He's trying to make himself look like this holy being... But in reality, he only wants to give his money to the Feds if everyone else has to give their money to the Feds.

 

Kind of the definition of hypocrisy....

[Shotgun 442]

He's trying to make himself look like this holy being... But in reality, he only wants to give his money to the Feds if everyone else has to give their money to the Feds.

 

Kind of the definition of hypocrisy....

 

Again, wat. How did you translate anything he said as him pretending like he's a holy being? He's talking about taxes and how rich people as a whole should be taxed more because it makes a hell of a lot more since than taxing poor and middle income people. You guys are trying to act like just because someone is rich he should just give a government whatever money he's earned. And it would only be hypocrisy if he said all this but did not actually believe in it. Him simply not handing over money to the gov unasked is not him being a hypocrite. Maybe you should learn the definition a little better.

 

Just to be clear, I'm also not some Warren Buffet fan. Any guy who has made $50 billion dollars doing the type of work and investments he's done is more than shady. But that doesn't mean what he says isn't correct.

[RazorStar 4,025]

Practice what you preach. Buffett is not running to give his extra money to the government. Which is why I say, nothing is stopping him.

Edited August 16, 2011 by RazorStar

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Again, wat. How did you translate anything he said as him pretending like he's a holy being? He's talking about taxes and how rich people as a whole should be taxed more because it makes a hell of a lot more since than taxing poor and middle income people. You guys are trying to act like just because someone is rich he should just give a government whatever money he's earned. And it would only be hypocrisy if he said all this but did not actually believe in it. Him simply not handing over money to the gov unasked is not him being a hypocrite. Maybe you should learn the definition a little better.

 

Just to be clear, I'm also not some Warren Buffet fan. Any guy who has made $50 billion dollars doing the type of work and investments he's done is more than shady. But that doesn't mean what he says isn't correct.

 

Really? Did you really just say that? Even though YOU are the one defending his statement to tax the filthy rich...

 

Something is out of place here.

[Shotgun 442]

The comment was in regards to your apparent thought that just because someone is rich they should hand money over to a government without being asked to. But I can see how my wording would be confusing. And I'm not trying to defend his statements because he said nothing wrong. I'm defending against the idea that he is a hypocrite for making this article on the grounds that he doesn't hand money to the government of his own accord when that doesn't have anything to do with the article he wrote. As I've said before his article is about refuting the position parties like the GOP have that taxing the rich would be harmful to the economy and how he thinks taxing the rich would in fact be more beneficial to the economy because it would put much more money into the government while at the same time helping out the poor and middle class. You guys are trying to act like he's in the wrong just because he hasn't thrown money at the government, especially when the guy donates tens of billions of dollars to charities, why the hell would he want to give it to a warmongering country when he isn't asked to?

[RazorStar 4,025]

If you're gonna ask the super rich to pave the way, take some initiative and do it yourself. That's all I'm saying. It'd be like you're a doctor and you want all the other doctors to use a super expensive medicine to help cure patients, but you won't do it yourself. Or being the pope and outlawing masturbation, while you're whacking your papal staff every night.

 

I completely agree that taxing the rich a fair amount would do wonders for revenue, I'm just shitting on the rich for not getting on board, even if they're speaking out the other end.

[Krawnka 282]

Sure, tax the rich more, so they have more reason to outsource American jobs to make up the difference...

[BucD+ 648]

Flat tax across the board...but it'll never happen...at least not in our lifetime...

[blotsfan 2,112]

The poll the OP posted is horrendously misleading. It puts people who want some tax increases with some spending cuts in the "TAX MOAR!!!" side regardless of how many spending cuts vs tax increases they want. Every reasonable person should know that the only way we can get out of this mess is by a combination of the two, so of course when you set it up that way it makes raising taxes seem more desirable.

[Krawnka 282]

Flat tax across the board...but it'll never happen...at least not in our lifetime...

 

 

It could happen, but they would just add it to income taxes, instead of abolishing the income tax..oh wait, I'm thinking of a VAT tax.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

The poll the OP posted is horrendously misleading. It puts people who want some tax increases with some spending cuts in the "TAX MOAR!!!" side regardless of how many spending cuts vs tax increases they want. Every reasonable person should know that the only way we can get out of this mess is by a combination of the two, so of course when you set it up that way it makes raising taxes seem more desirable.

 

It would be misleading if not for the GOP and Tea Party calling for exactly what the question asks in regards to spending cuts only.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Ah well we don't need polls to tell us that the tea party has become a joke. Its a shame, they actually started off as a good group with good ideas. Just kinda went crazy.

[Krawnka 282]

That's because the media focused on the crazy ones, for ratings, and whatever alterior motives they had...instead of the real grass roots people that associated with them.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Ah well we don't need polls to tell us that the tea party has become a joke. Its a shame, they actually started off as a good group with good ideas. Just kinda went crazy.

 

 

That's because the media focused on the crazy ones, for ratings, and whatever alterior motives they had...instead of the real grass roots people that associated with them.

 

I like it when people post what I am thinking before I post it... lol. The people running the campaign see the Tea Party (or rather what they stand for) as a threat. A major threat....

 

And look what happens... They get the media to portray them as a bunch of crazy, unintelligent, and doped up addicts... Which hey... kinda sounds familiar. Being that they (media) do the same exact thing to Ron Paul.

 

In reality, they are almost exactly opposite.. The people following Ron Paul and/or the Tea Party are usually much more sane, more politically savvy, and open to the truth in US politics... More so than the average voter in this country.

 

The main stream media benefits heavily from the 2 party system... Which is one of many reasons, it will never be taken down.