• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republians Want Taxes Increase, Just Not for the Rich

SlackMaster

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
598
Reaction score
399
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As we all know from the latest debt ceiling debate, Republicans do not want tax increases. They want to cut taxes, unless of course, you're one of those poor people. Poor people need to be taxed more...

"we're dismayed at the injustice that nearly half of all Americans don't even pay any income tax." - Rick Perry

“Marco Rubio was right when he said we don’t have enough people paying taxes in this country” - John Huntsman

"Part of the problem is today, only 53 percent pay any federal income tax at all; 47 percent pay nothing," ... "We need to broaden the base so that everybody pays something, even if it's a dollar. Everyone should pay something, because we all benefit." - Michelle Bachmann

So when we suggest raising taxes on the rich, it's "Class Warfare", but saying we should raise taxes on the poor... that's just common sense right?

Seriously?! :doh

Let's not also forget that those bottom 50% also pay sales tax, income tax, etc. All of which hit them harder than it does the rich. Income tax is only taxed on the first 100 thousand. For the rich, that's a tiny fraction, for the poor... it's a significant hit.

The 120 billion from raising the income tax back to its normal rate is significant and we need that, if you ask Republicans. That 700 billion from raising taxes on the the top 2% though... meh.

How is the Republican party NOT the party for the rich?
 
As we all know from the latest debt ceiling debate, Republicans do not want tax increases. They want to cut taxes, unless of course, you're one of those poor people. Poor people need to be taxed more...



So when we suggest raising taxes on the rich, it's "Class Warfare", but saying we should raise taxes on the poor... that's just common sense right?

Seriously?! :doh

Let's not also forget that those bottom 50% also pay sales tax, income tax, etc. All of which hit them harder than it does the rich. Income tax is only taxed on the first 100 thousand. For the rich, that's a tiny fraction, for the poor... it's a significant hit.

The 120 billion from raising the income tax back to its normal rate is significant and we need that, if you ask Republicans. That 700 billion from raising taxes on the the top 2% though... meh.

How is the Republican party NOT the party for the rich?

The rightwing has no principles they believe strongly enough to stick to them. They will abandon any and all of their so-called principles because they are addicted to winning, no matter what the cost

charlie-sheen-winning-resized-600.jpg
 
As we all know from the latest debt ceiling debate, Republicans do not want tax increases. They want to cut taxes, unless of course, you're one of those poor people. Poor people need to be taxed more...







So when we suggest raising taxes on the rich, it's "Class Warfare", but saying we should raise taxes on the poor... that's just common sense right?

Seriously?! :doh

Let's not also forget that those bottom 50% also pay sales tax, income tax, etc. All of which hit them harder than it does the rich. Income tax is only taxed on the first 100 thousand. For the rich, that's a tiny fraction, for the poor... it's a significant hit.

The 120 billion from raising the income tax back to its normal rate is significant and we need that, if you ask Republicans. That 700 billion from raising taxes on the the top 2% though... meh.

How is the Republican party NOT the party for the rich?

Romney isn't saying anything, one way or the other, but he is so weak he'll crumble to their side if he is elected.
 
except for the simple fact that the vast majority of that percentage is not from people who don't pay taxes, it's from people that use loopholes, thus, republicans aren't for raising taxes, just eliminating loopholes.

Also, I don't pay much into taxes, because I only make $24,000 a year, didn't know I was rich :shrug:
 
another thread whining about the rich. none of the GOP is against paying taxes. we are against one percent of the country being tasked with paying more and more taxes so dem politicians can buy the votes of the non tax payers

we also note that people who don't pay federal income taxes are more likely to vote for big spending politicians
 
another thread whining about the rich. none of the GOP is against paying taxes. we are against one percent of the country being tasked with paying more and more taxes so dem politicians can buy the votes of the non tax payers

we also note that people who don't pay federal income taxes are more likely to vote for big spending politicians

Like Bush43.........
 
so it is your learned opinion that Al Gore and John Heinz Kerry were the fiscal conservatives in those races?

Where in heavens name did you get that from in the post from winston?!?!?!
 
so it is your learned opinion that Al Gore and John Heinz Kerry were the fiscal conservatives in those races?

Well Gore was VP when surpluses were being projected by the CBO.
 
another thread whining about the rich. none of the GOP is against paying taxes. we are against one percent of the country being tasked with paying more and more taxes so dem politicians can buy the votes of the non tax payers

we also note that people who don't pay federal income taxes are more likely to vote for big spending politicians

For somebody who claims not to be in a party you sure have no compunction in speaking for all its members.
 
For somebody who claims not to be in a party you sure have no compunction in speaking for all its members.

this is what I call a contrarian post. you want to dispute something I said even if you don't have a rebuttal to the point I made
 
Well Gore was VP when surpluses were being projected by the CBO.

so it is your opinion gore was going to call for less spending than Bush?
 
this is what I call a contrarian post. you want to dispute something I said even if you don't have a rebuttal to the point I made

You made no coherent point to rebut... or agree with. You gave us the opinion of the Republican Party when you have no authority to speak for them.
 
Last edited:
You made no coherent point to rebut... or agree with. You gave us the opinion of the Republican Party when you have no authority to speak for them.

some things bear repeating

this is what I call a contrarian post. you want to dispute something I said even if you don't have a rebuttal to the point I made
 
some things bear repeating

Amen Brother Turtle, Amen. So here it is

You made no coherent point to rebut... or agree with. You gave us the opinion of the Republican Party when you have no authority to speak for them.
 
Please don't let teh standard rightwing whines and lies distract your from the issue this thread is supposed to be about - the hypocrisy of the rightwings current support for raising taxes, which according to them will slow the economy and destroy jobs.
 
You made no coherent point to rebut... or agree with. You gave us the opinion of the Republican Party when you have no authority to speak for them.

you now claim to speak for the Republican Party when you admit to being a paid subordinate to a dem politician?
 
you now claim to speak for the Republican Party when you admit to being a paid subordinate to a dem politician?

It's republicans who are calling for tax increases. They are speaking for themselves, and proving that they are hypocrits
 
It's republicans who are calling for tax increases. They are speaking for themselves, and proving that they are hypocrits

yeah dems are more consistent on this issue?

making those who don't pay any income taxes pay some will

1) provide an incentive for them not to vote for more big spenders

2) NOT retard job growth since those people don't create any jobs to begin with

3) generate more income than jacking up taxes on the top one percent to the pre-bush clinton rates

dems whine about the Bush rates costing revenue but want to keep the vote buying cuts for everyone but the rich--now that is the true hypocrisy
 
More shenanigans and class warfare from the right. They run around screaming that they are T.axed E.nough. A.lready, yet ardently support increasing taxes on the poor.
 
yeah dems are more consistent on this issue?

The "they do it too" argument is childish, and if you expect me to defend dems, then I'm going to ask you to share what you're smoking with me

making those who don't pay any income taxes pay some will

1) provide an incentive for them not to vote for more big spenders

2) NOT retard job growth since those people don't create any jobs to begin with

3) generate more income than jacking up taxes on the top one percent to the pre-bush clinton rates

dems whine about the Bush rates costing revenue but want to keep the vote buying cuts for everyone but the rich--now that is the true hypocrisy

Thanks for tossing the rightwing argument against raising taxes under the bus. Thanks for confirming that there isn't one "principle" that rightwingers won't abandon for political expediency.

Now, it's OK for the rightwingers to support the govt when it "steals" money that belongs to the taxpayers who earned that money.
 
More shenanigans and class warfare from the right. They run around screaming that they are T.axed E.nough. A.lready, yet ardently support increasing taxes on the poor.

if you want representation you should suffer taxation. tell me why that is wrong
 
The "they do it too" argument is childish, and if you expect me to defend dems, then I'm going to ask you to share what you're smoking with me



Thanks for tossing the rightwing argument against raising taxes under the bus. Thanks for confirming that there isn't one "principle" that rightwingers won't abandon for political expediency.

Now, it's OK for the rightwingers to support the govt when it "steals" money that belongs to the taxpayers who earned that money.

the main rightwing arguments against raising taxes on those who PAY TOO MUCH ALREADY include

1) the rich pay too much and raising taxes on them only encourages dems to spend more and voters who don't pay much, if any taxes, to vote for big spenders

2) raising taxes on job creators or investors will retard job creation or investment. those arguments don't really apply to people who are not paying taxes currently

so your claims are pure bunk
 
if you want representation you should suffer taxation. tell me why that is wrong

They are taxed. There's nothing in the saying "no taxation without representation" that requires the payment of federal income taxes. Other taxes are just as valid, say inheritance taxes for example :lol:
 
the main rightwing arguments against raising taxes on those who PAY TOO MUCH ALREADY include

1) the rich pay too much and raising taxes on them only encourages dems to spend more and voters who don't pay much, if any taxes, to vote for big spenders

2) raising taxes on job creators or investors will retard job creation or investment. those arguments don't really apply to people who are not paying taxes currently

so your claims are pure bunk

Actually, the argument that rightwingers have used, including you, is that its their money and the govt has no right to steal the money that they earned. Now that this theft is OK with the rightwingers, I'm reminded of a saying coined by Willie Sutton, who was a bank robber. Are you familiar with the saying?
 
Back
Top Bottom