Sorry Obama, but "tax the rich" crap just doesn't live up to reality.

I did the same thing at another forum a few months ago, but the Obamafanatics really don't get it. We have to cut spending and if we're keeping income tax, then everyone who has any income needs to pay and the "refunds" that are larger than anyone paid in (or for those who pay nothing) have to stop. Those are entitlements, not refunds.

As usual you missed the point Ted. Obama's point isn't that taxing the rich will solve everything, his point is that we have to put everyone on the table. Not just cut everything for the little people, and keep everything for the rich.

Yes, and he did all that complaining(again) about corporate jets when he had just come back from a thinly disguised campaign trip to the mid-west on his super big jet with all the entourage and the reserve jet that also goes along. His little trip cost so much more than many, many of the trips taken by the corporate jets, probably months if not years worth of trips taken by almost all of them put together. And of course we taxpayers are paying for his trip to try to win re-election.

I'm poor and I have to agree with you on this one. Everyone should pay a certain percentage of their income and it should be the same percentage for everyone. As for getting back more than what you put in...well, I've always just thought that was a little weird. I don't know...I really do some creative budgeting to get by but I have a strong sense of fairness and it really isn't fair to charge people more just because they have more to spare. I mean, do they pay more for a gallon of milk just because they can? Do I get to pay less just because I scraped up change to get it? The logic escapes me.

Thats call divide and rule.We in India have experienced a lot this kind of politics. Looks like usa also going same way. Hate politics doesn't add anything.Our country was about to collapse economically on 1990.Thats where it goes to.

Most of the rich have a lot of their money tied up in either the stock market, or in corporations. Corporations have to show a profit or they get shutdown with in a few years. These corporations pass the taxes on to the consumer and we end up paying for it in increased prices. Therefore corporation to not pay the taxes, we the consumers do. Taxes on the rich and the corporations is a tax on us all. Also, Obama has a habit of giving the biggest corporation a break on the new taxes because they are the ones who donate to his campaigns. Therefore the new tax laws would be written by the large corporations and the riches people that would give the a edge over the rest of the corporations. This making the rich richer and hurting the competition and small guy. We need to go to a flat tax system. We may pay more taxes, but we would see lower costs in the store, more start-up corporations and more competition in the business world. This all will create more jobs and less expensive products.

It's all part of the class warfare push..

" 'tax the rich' crap" is just that. He talks good, but he's more focused on destroying the poor. Make them all welfare recipients and totally dependent on the government so you can do what you want to with them. Take away Medicare, take away Social Security - the two things they've paid for so they have nothing to fall back on except welfare. He won't tax the rich. He's rich himself and I can't see him paying more. It's a smoke screen while the dirty work is done without too many noticing it.

It is not about need more tax revenue it is simply that the rich have money and President Obama wants it to give to his supporters. If you look at the Bush Tax Cuts (2003) you will notice something very interesting, after the tax cuts, (viewed as taking money from the government) the revenue to the federal government grew each year and during the last two years the federal government took in (2007) $2568 Billion Dollars and in 2008 $2524 Billion Dollars both amounts the largest amount of tax revenue taken in by the government. Even now President Obama has taken in (2009) $2105 Billion Dollars and in (2010)$2162.7 Billion Dollars. The problem is not with revenue to the government it is government spending. President Obama has spent, $3517.7 Billion Dollars in 2009, and in 2010 he has spent $3456.2 Billion Dollars. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200 The problem is clearly not a revenue problem but a spending problem. and to quote a well know orator “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” Senator Obama 2006.

It sounds like this is well researched. I think we all need to participate in the taxes as we all participate in the benefits. We all drive on the streets, etc. We all should pay some. The entire financing of the government should not land on the shoulders of any class.

We've all seen these figures, so even someone as ignorant as Hussein should know this by now, or not. It does not matter because he does not care. This is not really part of his agenda. The destruction of the American economy is the ultimate goal of his agenda.

That is a very scary thought, that if all the richest people in the world handed over all their money to the government, we'd still be in serious debt. How did we even get so far down a debt hole anyway? I also don't think any amount of taxing the rich is going to help us out. And I wonder why congress and senate members get to make 400,000 dollars a year when we're so far in debt.

Why does this have to always be about class warfare. You guys overlook some very basic factors. Especially when it comes to the last and current president. 1 Bush passed tax cuts for the rich which were supposed to boost the economy then expire. When bush left office the economy was at it worst state in decades but the cuts got extended. Simply expiring these cuts would increase taxes on the rich. 2 Bush escalated war in the middle east. The cost of this is over 1.2 trillion and climbing. Obama is trying to minimize troops there reducing this cost. That's a good way of cutting back on spending. 3 To the fault of neither or all parties. Many American companies have been outsourcing greatly reducing the amount of middle class tax revenue. 4 Finally as I pointed out in another thread the tax system is unfair. By way of gas tax, sales tax, property tax, etc. A middle class person may pay out 20% of their income in taxes, while a rich person pays a much smaller percent of their income for the same goods, even after income tax. Big businesses are getting tax cuts and the elite are eating meals, driving cars, taking trips etc. as a "business expense" while the little guy pays for every meal he eats and all the cost of his vehicle. That corporate jet flies someone somewhere as a business expense. But they aren't being used to take the middle class workers of the same company to out of state meetings. Why should writing off a 2 billion dollar plane be business related if you still have to buy coach tickets for most of the company? Why should the food I eat at my job not be a deduction for me? Why is driving the company car to lunch a business expense but when I have to take my lunch break my miles come out of my pocket? Through loopholes, tax breaks, and consumer end taxes the rich pay far less taxes for what they actually get. Then they export jobs at the the expense of workers to rack in profits from Americans. A car company makes a car in Mexico, 90% of the work and assembly is done there (jobs that used to be done here), the company then trucks it across the border and sells it to American consumers who had nothing to do with it's manufacture. The consumer pays taxes on that vehicle while company pockets huge profits. That same consumer who now has to work out how to pay his credit card from an American institution with a guy in a 3rd world country call center who makes one third the pay. While all the interest and fees are going to an American company. All this class warfare is jibberish. It doesn't matter who we tax or how much. Pretty soon the only thing "American" about a company is going to be where the owner lives (GE already outsourced over half its labor force). The rich might pay some taxes, but they are undercutting the American economy to take more and give less (jobs/wages) to the people that buy their products. It's not a matter of jealously. It's a matter of greed and time before a total collapse of unsustainable economics. Our economy is going to continue to dive until we reach an equilibrium with the economies of those countries in which most of our consumer goods are produced. When it becomes no more profitable to make a car in Mexico or a shoe in China only then will they produce them locally. You can say were moving forward and creating new jobs. But 100 million lower jobs being outsourced or cut at 35k/year/job (guessed average since UAW and others made quite a bit more) adds up to $3.5 trillion in US worker income. How's even getting even 2% of that look? Not to mention having it circulating in the economy right now. The middle class is the crumbling foundation this country.

How did Bill Clinton manage to do it? He left Bush II a strong economy with a solid and hefty surplus, which of course the younger Bush managed to leave in shambles. What were Clinton's raft of taxing and spending policies and development strategies? What was his vision for the US? I think President Obama has to study what Clinton did in the economic and fiscal (as well as monetary) fronts.

I heard that there are some people in the States that do not pay any taxes. Now I lam not talking about those around the poverty line, because there has to be a certain point where paying taxes would hurt you. You would be unable to exist and you would not be able to pay rent or whatever. But when I hear that there are those in the middle class who do not pay taxes, I wonder. Why in Canada, if you are over the allowed amount you pay taxes. That also applies to seniors so those making over a certain amount would be taxed for that amount of their social assistance. But not only that, there are some who feel a sense of entiitlement, and take advantage of it. Unwed mothers who decide to increase their children to get more assistance, fathers wbo do not pay for the upkeep of their children and lie about what they make, or do not try to get a higher education so that they can support their children, sons and daughters who let the State care for their aged parents. So one cannot say the rich must pay, when they refuse to help themselves. It is class warfare. Those who want to tax the rich and I am sure there are rich they consider exempt from this category, many of them feel that because of life's circumstances, an d their race, that they are entitled to the rich's money and secretly I bet that they really wish that they were rich instead.