Obama: The People Want Tax Increases

From The Hill:

President Obama on Friday kept up the pressure on Republicans to agree to revenue increases in a deal to raise the debt ceiling, claiming 80 percent of the public supports Democrats’ demand for tax increases.

“The American people are sold,” Obama said. “The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically.”…

Ok, Mr. President, then have Harry Reid pass a debt deal through the Senate which includes tax increases…get those 53 Democrat Senators on record as doing the will of the people.  After all, if the people are “sold” on it, then the Democrat majority in the Senate should be happy to oblige the people…there can’t be the slightest worry that a Democrat up for re-election in 2012 will vote against because, as you say, the people are “sold” on it.

Time to put up or shut up, Mr. President…don’t ask us GOPers to be the tax collectors for Big Government.  Do it yourself – if you can.

UPDATE:  From Gallup

Might want to re-think that “sold” bit there, Mr. President.

UPDATE II:  We’re all raaaaacists for not raising the debt ceiling.

35 thoughts on “Obama: The People Want Tax Increases

  1. casper July 15, 2011 / 3:36 pm

    Mark,
    You know the Senate can’t pass anything without 60 votes.

  2. casper July 15, 2011 / 3:43 pm

    Mark,
    Didn’t you just propose a 1% tax on wealth over $5 million? Sounds to me like you want a tax increase.

    • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 3:52 pm

      I want a tax increase on the 48% looters and takers who pay NO federal income tax, yet are able to vote entitlements for them selves.
      By all means make them pay 35% of their gross income as I do.
      The rest of us read my lips FUBO

    • Mark Noonan July 15, 2011 / 4:25 pm

      Casper,

      That is political – if you liberals really want to tax the rich, then let’s just get on and tax the rich. We pass out of the House a wealth tax and then watch your side kill it in the Senate, or have Obama veto it if by some chance it passes out of there. I’m sick to death of this “GOP party of the rich” when the “millionaires and billionaires” are actually mostly on the Democrat side…and Obama’s calls to tax the “millionaires and billionaires” is utter BS…his tax hikes won’t hit them, at all, but will hit the upper middle class owners of small businesses, ranches and farms…in other words, the most productive and worthwhile citizens. That wealth tax is a knife at the heart of the liberal scam.

      • casper July 15, 2011 / 9:58 pm

        Mark,
        Obama wants to end tax loops for hedge fund managers and buyers of yachts. Hardly the middle class owners of small businesses. If you are sick of being the party of the rich, then quit defending them.

      • RetiredSpook July 15, 2011 / 10:42 pm

        Obama wants to end tax loops for hedge fund managers and buyers of yachts.

        Yeah, Casper, cause the last time the government decided to punish yacht owners, it worked out so well.

        Since the tax took effect in January 1990, hundreds of builders of large and small boats have spoken of it as a stake driven into the heart of an industry already suffering from the recession, tighter bank rules on financing and fallout from the gulf war.

        In the last two years, about 100 builders of luxury boats — recreational craft costing more than $100,000 — cut their operations severely and laid off thousands of workers. Some builders filed for protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code. (emphasis added)

      • Mark Noonan July 15, 2011 / 11:31 pm

        Casper

        No, no, no – if you want to tax the rich then I insist you tax the rich. I want you to go to your money bags, George Soros, and tell him that next year you’ll want $300 million of his money deposited in to the Treasury. You do that, then we’ll talk…but unless you are willing to take a stab at the plutocrat masters of liberalism, I won’t budge an inch on taxes.

      • MontyBurns July 16, 2011 / 1:34 am

        “If you are sick of being the party of the rich, then quit defending them.”

        You do realize you’ve presented him with an impossible quandary, right?

      • RetiredSpook July 16, 2011 / 10:44 am

        Casper,

        I got curious after reading your comment about hedge funds and yacht owners. Just for fun I Googled jobs required to build luxury yacht. I hadn’t even thought of all the jobs created after the yacht is built. Now there is a prime example of “trickle-down economics” if ever I’ve seen one.

      • Amazona July 17, 2011 / 5:34 pm

        spook, I once hired a young man who had learned to sail and crewed on a family friend’s boat for a trip from South Africa to Ireland. After he left my ranch, he went to the Caribbean, where he worked on yachts. He came back to visit once and brought several of the friends he had met there, and it was fascinating to hear the stories of their adventures.

        One young woman had gone to cooking school right out of high school and then gotten a job as chef on a private yacht. Once she learned more about the yachting world she got an apartment in one of the towns where yachts call in and started to work short-term jobs, a few weeks a time, for different owners. She got to go all over the world, saved a lot of money, and had a great time.

        I have since told young people who are not sure they want to go straight to college to give this life a try, doing a stint in some kind of trade school and then working the yacht circuit for a while.

        (The young man who worked for me got his captain’s license and is now the captain of a huge freighter.)

        There are plenty of jobs associated with private aircraft, too—mechanics, maintenance, crew, plus the industries that supply the aircraft with necessities like tires and fuel.

        Going after “The Rich” always has its associated Unintended Consequences, which are not understood by the Left because they have no grasp of basic economics.

        Witness dennis’s whine about needing more taxes and regulations on those big corporations whose profiteering moguls are laughing all the way to the bank. Not a word yet on how adding to the cost of doing business will encourage these businesses to expand and create more jobss.

  3. GreenMountainBoy July 15, 2011 / 3:50 pm

    I would also like to propose a tax. A federal tax on all movie theater and concert tickets of $5.00 each. Liberals love taxes, this should help them pay thier “fair share”. Silly me concert goers and movie patrons are vastly libs. This tax is dead on arrival. 😦

    • Mark Noonan July 15, 2011 / 11:39 pm

      GMB,

      Agreed. Also, a $100,000.00 tax on all beach front property owned by anyone who makes more than $1 million a year. A $10,000.00 tax on every housing unit above the 10th floor on any building. A 20% surtax on all federal incomes in excess of the national median income. We can go on like this for days…all of them taxes on the real rich, not one of which the liberals would ever agree to.

    • bardolf July 16, 2011 / 9:59 pm

      You don’t like movies?

    • Amazona July 17, 2011 / 5:23 pm

      You don’t like music?

      • bardolf July 17, 2011 / 8:38 pm

        Amazona,

        I can’t answer for GMB but I love music. I like everything from classical to rap, country to heavy metal, indie to pop music. I love people expressing themselves even when they can barely differentiate themselves from what has already been done.

        Concert going has changed from a young person’s affair- waiting on the cold sidewalk until the ticket office opens- to a middle age affair of buying overpriced tickets from ticketmaster. Being middle age I appreciate the convenience at the expense of 10$ tickets of yore.

  4. ragingbull July 15, 2011 / 3:54 pm

    zerobama isn’t afraid to pull numbers out of thin air to support his agenda. remember all of those jobs he created or “saved”. even though you really can’t quantify a “saved” job. but it was in the millions and he did it. why did he stop at 80%? how about 82% or 87%? or did his handlers tell him that the people might see through that?

    • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 4:01 pm

      the community agitator is a pathological liar, and a very dangerous man for this country.

      Psalm 109:8

    • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 4:24 pm

      Cluster

      Yeah,
      I heard the TAX CHEAT charlie wrangle (AKA fred sanford) spouting the same BS.
      Both as dumb as a box of rocks (apologies to rocks) and typical useful idiots.
      Watch for the O-chimpy army of racists to be screaming this from their ghetto rooftops in the next few weeks.

      • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 4:49 pm

        Amazing…….

      • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 5:01 pm

        ROTFLMAO…….gotta see

    • neocon1 July 15, 2011 / 5:10 pm

      Lefty LIES,
      of course people who pay NO taxes and suck OPM want to squeeze the goose for more golden eggs.
      We all know how that worked out eh?
      48% pay NO federal tax
      53% pay LESS than 3% of federal taxes.
      now who was in that pole from?

      liberalism is a mental disorder
      marx/alinsky 101

  5. Amazona July 15, 2011 / 5:22 pm

    I think a poll like this should question only people who already pay taxes.

    Asking people if they want more of other peoples’ money is a no-brainer. It’s like having two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

  6. RetiredSpook July 15, 2011 / 8:03 pm

    The government could just confiscate all the wealth of America’s billionaires. That would fix the problem, right?

    • Mark Noonan July 15, 2011 / 11:47 pm

      Spook,

      My bet is that they know that very well – which is why the tax on the “millionaires and billionaires” kicks in at $250,000.00 per year. They’ll talk about taxing corporate jets, but what they really mean is “tax the plumbing contractor”. It is simple math: confiscate George Soros’ wealth and you’ll get a one-time windfall of $30 billion or so…but take an extra $10,000 out of each person making $250,000.00 or more per year and you pull in $23 billion per year, year after year. But, of course, the people who actually make that income aren’t the super rich…the super rich don’t get hit by such taxes as their accumulated wealth is non-taxed. So, you might get another $10,000.00 out of Bill Gates next year (though that is doubtful as he has a team of accountants and lawyers to prevent that), but that will be $10,000.00 out of $40 billion…meanwhile, we’ll have hit the guy making $800,000.00 as a plumbing contractor up for $10,000.00…which may well mean one less employee, or a postponed expansion, etc.

  7. tiredoflibbs July 15, 2011 / 9:02 pm

    This is obAMATEUR’s style of leadership…… PASS THE BUCK!!!

    He has done it on almost every major piece of legislation, budgets and continuing resolutions.

    Where is the leadership???

  8. 4moreyears July 15, 2011 / 10:18 pm

    Neo, that’s quite a statement, 35% of gross for fed taxes eh? Since the top marginal rate is 35% that’s nothing short of impossible. You are a liar, but frankly I’m not too surprised.

    Oh, to the others who like to pass around that old line about the “federal income taxes”, everyone pays taxes. If they don’t pay federal, they pay payroll, which incidentally is 50% of the fed take (guess who pays little of that?), and everyone pays local, state, sales, excise, gas etc, etc. the effective tax rate on the poorest of the poor is about 18-20% depending on which state you live in – red states being worse for the poor. The top 0.1%? They pay about about 35%. Cry me a freaking river. The other thing people often forget is that while the top quintile pays 60% of all taxes, they earn 60% of all income. Go figure trickle downers.

    • RetiredSpook July 15, 2011 / 11:22 pm

      So, FMY, I assume, since you’d changed your name to 4moreyears, you’d like to see Obama reelected. What’s he done so far that you’d like to see more of?

      • Amazona July 16, 2011 / 2:12 pm

        spook, you saw mitch’s reply to many of the same questions in another thread.

        I really admire him for his candid response. Finally, a Lefty with courage.

        I disagree on nearly every point he made, but found it refreshing to see someone come right out and say what he thinks the nation should look like.

        He stopped short of advocating a Leftist policy by name, but everything he said was a rejection of Constitutional principles and law and a desire for a nanny-state kind of nation, where states are “subservient” to the feds.

        And this is what I was looking for—clarity. I’m betting that mitch has never sat down and compared his ideology to that of the Constitution and ended up saying to himself “Wow! I really don’t think this is the best way to run the country!” But as he wrote, this is what came out.

        And I think the other Libs here would agree with him.

        And THIS should be the basis of the next election. Not which party has the most pervs or who screwed up what, when, but which system ought to be in place to run the nation. Not which political identity is most appealing, but which political SYSTEM is most productive. Not which personal attacks are most gratifying, but which analyses are most accurate and applicable.

    • Amazona July 16, 2011 / 9:36 am

      Oh,so after calling neo a liar for saying he pays 35% of his income in taxes, citing only the federal tax rate, you admit that he pays other taxes, too. So YOU”RE the liar. Frankly, I’m not at all surprised.

      Well, you don’t “pay payroll” if you’re unemployed, and if your income is so low you don’t pay federal taxes then your SS and Medicare payroll taxes will come back to you many times over.

      Where do you get your figures on “the effective tax rate on the poorest of the poor is about 18-20% depending on which state you live in”?

      Where do you get your information that red states are “worse for the poor”?

      Why do you think it better to take from the productive and redistribute to the less productive, instead of allowing the productive to use their money to develop the economy so the poor can support themselves through their own efforts?

      Why do you think it better for the poor to have the private property of others confiscated and doled out to them by the government than it is to have an economy strong enough for them to be able to work and earn what they have?

      Can you give examples of “the poor” rising from poverty due to government handouts? Isn’t it true that those who have risen from poverty to at least the middle class have done so by their own efforts, through hard work and diligence, and not from being supported by the government? Isn’t it true that we have millions in this nation now who are second, third, fourth generation welfare recipients, proof that handouts do nothing to end poverty but merely extend it?

      Can you direct us to any part of our foundational ruling document which deals with charity? (What you Libs call “fairness”.) The Constitution is about protection, not morality. The Constitution provides a framework of protection for the American citizen, within which he has the freedom to succeed or fail, and leaves issues of morality to the states, and the people. Where do you find the legal mechanism, much less the philosophy, in our Constitution, that allows the confiscation of private property for redistribution by the State?

      Where in the writings of the Founding Fathers do you find support for federally-funded “fairness”?

      Aren’t you really saying that you think there is a better blueprint for governing our nation, one based on collectivism and redistributionism, and that you think we should change from our Constitutional form of government (or what’s left of it) to this other political system?

      • RetiredSpook July 16, 2011 / 10:02 am

        Amazona,

        You don’t really expect to get a rational answer from a smarmy little creep who stops by to drop his little verbal turds on this blog once or twice a year, do you?

        It would be interesting to see at least one of our Libs answer your questions, but I’m not holding my breath. It’s pretty clear by now that they think “principles” and “values” are nonsense.

  9. GreenMountainBoy July 16, 2011 / 6:02 am

    How about a $1.00 federal tax on every cup of starbucks coffee sold in the U.S. After all if you can afford 5 bucks, 6 bucks should not be all that hard. Pay your fair share libs.

  10. neocon1 July 16, 2011 / 9:59 am

    Neo, that’s quite a statement, 35% of gross for fed taxes eh? Since the top marginal rate is 35% that’s nothing short of impossible. You are a liar, but frankly I’m not too surprised.

    I own a business D bag,
    Ama has already proven who the fool and liar is, so there no further need to point out your stupidity you did that all by your self.

Comments are closed.